►
From YouTube: Boulder City Council Meeting 7-27-23
Description
No description was provided for this meeting.
If this is YOUR meeting, an easy way to fix this is to add a description to your video, wherever mtngs.io found it (probably YouTube).
A
A
A
A
A
B
B
Er
city
council,
oh
Emily's,
got
the
recording
going
this
way,
I'm
going
to
start
again
good
evening
and
welcome
to
tonight's
study
session
of
the
Boulder
City
Council
on
July
27
2023
I
am
council
member
Weiner
and
thank
you
so
much
for
joining
us.
We
have
on
tonight's
agenda
two
items.
Our
first
item
will
be
the
update
on
police
oversight,
ordinance
revision
process
and
our
second
item
is
the
use
table
and
standards
update
and
discussion
on
Neighborhood
Center
changes.
B
Before
we
go
into
our
work
items.
I
would
like
to
outline
how
the
meeting
will
be
conducted.
We
will
review
staff's
presentation
for
each
of
the
items
and
then
we
will
have
a
time
for
questions.
At
the
end
of
the
presentation,
we
will
conduct
our
Council
discussion
with
staff.
If
you
have
any
questions,
please
wait
for
staff
to
complete
their
presentation.
We
will
now.
C
You
so
much
council
member
super
excited
to
have
a
quick
update
on
the
efforts
we
have
been
having
regarding
the
police
oversight,
ordinance
revisions.
I
know,
police
oversight
has
been
a
topic
in
our
community
and
amongst
Council
for
a
while
now,
and
we
embarked
on
a
review
of
our
current
ordinances
to
see
what
changes
we
needed.
C
What
tweaks
we
needed
to
do,
and
hopefully
also
identifying
where
the
areas
that
the
ordinance
serves
us
well
as
we
move
forward,
I
have
had
the
great
privilege
of
working
with
our
consultant
Miss
Fara
muscadin
in
Austin.
She
was
the
oversight
director
in
Austin
and
while
I
tried
to
get
her
mightily
to
come
work
for
us,
the
best
we
can
do
was
get
her
in
a
Consulting
role
and
so
you'll
hear
from
pharah
some
of
the
conversations
she's
been
having
both
with
the
panel
but
with
a
broader
stakeholder
group
and
in
community.
C
D
Good
evening,
everyone
thank
you
Nuria
for
the
introduction.
Again.
My
name
is
Vera
muscadin
and
consultant
for
the
city,
as
it
relates
to
police
oversight
and
a
few
other
items,
particularly
with
your
forthcoming
independent
police,
monitor
I,
am
very
happy
to
be
here
to
give
you
an
update
on
the
work
that
we've
been
doing
so
far.
D
As
you
know,
I
came
on
board
in
about
a
February
and
initially
I
had
lots
of
conversations
with
Community,
current
and
former
council
members
former
and
current
panel
members
I
the
task
force
members,
various
Community
organizations,
and
it
was
really
important
that
I
had
those
preliminary
conversations
to
kind
of
see
the
landscape
of
oversight
in
in
Boulder.
Before
you
know,
I
dived
in
and
rolled
up
the
sleeves
to
see
kind
of
what
the
areas
were
that
we
needed
to
address.
D
D
You
thank
you
Emily,
so
if
we
could
go
to
the
next
slide,
please
so
in
today's
presentation,
I'm
going
to
discuss
the
preliminary
observations
that
I've
had-
and
this
is
primarily
from
February
March
April
when
I
first
came
on
board
and
all
the
conversations
that
I
had
then
we'll
go
into
Community
feedback,
particularly
feedback
that
I
had
from
all
those
various
stakeholders
that
I
spoke
to
initially
and
then
in
collaboration
with
the
police
oversight
panel
and
the
city.
D
There
was
a
community
event
on
June
21st
and
just
going
to
highlight
some
feedback
from
that
event
and
then
go
into
the
police
oversight.
Work
group
we've
been
we've
had
several
meetings
and
have
made
some
significant
progress
so
giving
you
an
overview
of
that
timeline
on
where
we're
at
where
we're
going.
Next
steps
for
the
work,
particularly
around
the
police
oversight,
ordinance
revision
and
then
concluding
with
questions
and
discussion
from
you
council
members
next
slide,
please!
D
So
again,
when
I
first
came
on,
I
attended
some
trainings
with
the
panel
I
did
a
ride
along
I
talked
to
several
again
current
and
former
panel
members.
I
had
meetings
with
the
chief
and
then
also
with
the
Professional
Standards
unit,
just
to
really
get
an
understanding
of
Boulder.
D
It's
really
a
police
oversight
is
very
specific
to
the
community
and-
and
you
don't
necessarily
want
to
go
in
with
any
sort
of
assumption,
so
I
really
wanted
to
come
in
and
be
a
sponge
and
learn
as
much
as
I
can
about
not
only
Boulder
but
also
the
system
and
so
time
participating
in
panel
meetings
watching
panel
meetings
and
really
understanding
the
landscape.
D
And
so
these
are
my
preliminary
observations.
Just
from
those
first
couple
of
months
of
being
on
on
board-
and
you
know
the
the
the
independent
monitor
being
on
the
panel
I
I
would
recommend
changing
that
and
making
them
more
of
a
liaison.
There
really
isn't
a
need
for
the
the
monitor
be
to
be
on
the
panel
and
obviously
I
came
in
shortly.
After
some
a
particular
some
piano
members
were
appointed.
D
So
obviously,
the
selection
process
was
a
big
conversation
during
that
time,
and
so
there
were
some
particular
observations
that
I
made
about
that
and
then
defining
the
scope
of
the
panel,
particularly
around
allegations
of
police
misconduct
and
what
their
role
is
in
terms
of
making
recommendations
around
policy
and
training
for
the
police
department.
D
I
think
it's
really
important
that
we
formalize
an
onboarding
process
so
that
the
new
panel
members
are
given
a
lot
of
support
and
information
and
grounding
and
civilian
oversight
in
the
process
and
really
really
setting
a
framework
where,
whenever
new
panel
members
come
on
board.
This
is
what
happened
and
ensuring
that
it's
pretty
systematic
in
terms
of
the
training
and
that
process.
D
I
also
think,
particularly
when
there
there's
work
in
a
departmental
work
that
having
a
standard
operating
procedure
is
important,
so
that
expectations
are
managed,
and
we
are
all
on
the
same
page
so
having
a
standing
operating
procedure
with
the
panel
and
the
police
department,
and
particularly
maybe
with
the
Monitor
and
the
police
department,
just
to
understand
processes
in
terms
of
onboarding
training.
Case
assignment
case
review.
D
How
you
know
discipline
recommendations,
how
those
are
going
to
handle
and
that's,
in
my
opinion,
more
appropriate
for
standing
operating
procedure,
because
you
don't
necessarily
you
want
the
ordinance
to
give
guidance,
but
you
don't
want
it
to
be
too
prescriptive,
and
so
some
of
those
details
are
really
more
appropriate
in
a
standing
operating
procedure.
The
other
observation
that
has
is
clarifying
the
type
of
data
and
the
format
that
the
panel
request
that
it
that
comes
from
the
police
department
and
then
ensuring
that
there's
a
formal,
ongoing
training
for
panel
members.
D
Initially,
it
can
be
a
bit
overwhelming
for
panda
members
when
they
come
on,
because
it's
a
lot
of
information
but
I
think
there's
a
way
to
give
them
information
over
time
and
to
plan
it
out
so
that
it's
not
so
overwhelming
but
ensure
that,
for
example,
you
know
some
of
the
panel
members
went
through
simulation
training
in
in
the
police
department.
That
training
is
great.
D
And
these
are
again
conversations
that
I
had
in
the
beginning
of
the
year
first
quarter
of
the
year.
It
was
pretty
obvious
that
everyone
understood
that
you
know
Boulder
has
civilian
oversight,
but
in
terms
of
the
role
and
the
purview
that
varied
across
the
board-
and
you
know,
I
I've
had
conversations.
D
You
know
if
I
asked
people
what
the
panel
did
or
what
the
manager
did.
I
think
I
would
get
a
different
answer
from
every
person.
So
so
that
was
obviously
an
initial
observation
of
making
sure
that
we
have
a
common
understanding
to
the
best
that
we
could,
but
the
the
understanding
of
the
role
in
the
purview
of
the
panel
did
vary
greatly.
There
was
a
lot
of
feedback
about
the
selection
process
of
about
it
being
overwhelming
becoming
a
little
bit
too
political
and
really
needing
to
be
revised.
D
I
mean
that
was
pretty
pretty
consistent
that
we
needed
to
figure
out
a
different
way
to
do
this
election
process
next
slide.
Please
and
then
some
questions
arose
from
the
feedback,
particularly
about
the
budget
for
the
Monitor
and
the
panel,
whether
or
not
how
the
process
should
be
delineated
to
obtain
data
from
the
police
department.
Whether
or
not
the
panel
should
have
access
to
outside
counsel
and
then
also
whether
or
not
we
can
formalize
onboarding
and
training
for
new
panel
members.
D
Next
slide,
please
so
at
the
June
19th
actually
yeah
the
June
19th
Community
event
that
was
held
at
the
Boulder
Public
Library,
and
it
was
essentially
an
open
forum
and
the
goal
was
to
get
feedback
from
Community
about
the
current
ordinance
and
kind
of
the
current
state
of
police
oversight
in
Boulder
and
the
perspectives
varied
greatly.
D
There's
a
lot
of
conversation
about
trust-
and
these
are
just
kind
of
highlighted,
a
few
that
were
pretty
consistent
across
the
feedback
that
we
received
overwhelmingly
I,
think
that
people
support
oversight
but
obviously
want
it
to
be
meaningful
and
productive.
There
was
concern
about
the
language
of
perceived
bias
and
what
that
means
is.
D
It
relates
to
the
selection
process
and
also
the
not
quite
understanding
the
scope
of
the
panel
and
some
of
the
concerns
about
the
panel
eroding
trust
from
the
law
enforcement
perspective
and
potentially
risking
losing
officers,
and
then
that
also
leading
to
a
conversation
about
trust,
generally
trust
between
community
and
the
police
department
and
then
obviously,
from
the
police
department
to
community
and
figuring
out
a
way
how
we
do
that
in
terms
of
Reviving
this
this
process
and
then
wanting
the
panel
to
be
more
representative
of
the
community
and
and
looking
at
particularly
how
to
reinforce
the
panel's
role
in
terms
of
making
policy
recommendations.
D
So
those
are
some
of
you,
the
highlights
from
the
the
community
event
we
had
in
June
next
slide,
please
so
around
June
I
created
the
police
oversight,
ordinance,
work
group
and
essentially
my
vision
of
this
work
group
was
I.
Pre
I
specifically
wanted
panel
members
on
it
because
there's
an
understanding
of
direct
understanding
of
how
the
current
ordinance
impacts
their
work,
so
that
understanding
was
important.
Obviously
we
wanted
Community
perspective
and
then
obviously
the
police
department
is,
is
obviously
an
active
stakeholder
in
this
conversation.
D
So
they
needed
to
be
represented
at
the
table
and
because
it's
an
ordinance,
it
involves
legal.
So
we
have
City
attorney
representation.
So
there
are
about
seven
of
us.
If
my
math
is
right
and
I'm
there
primarily
facilitating
the
conversation.
So
it's
a
very,
very
I,
think
well
represented
group
and
diverse
group.
That
brings
not
only
expertise
from
the
current
state
of
oversight
and
how
it's
being
applied
right
now,
but
then
also
outside
perspectives
of
those
that
have
been
watching
the
process
and
under
understanding
kind
of
the
conversations
have
been
going
on.
D
Please
so
just
to
give
you
a
brief
summary
about
our
process
and
so
I
have
obviously
reviewed
the
ordinance
at
nauseam
and
I,
divided
it
up
into
topics
and
subject
areas
to
kind
of
just
reorganize
it
and
so
each
meeting
we
have
a
a
couple
topic
areas.
We
meet
weekly
for
two
hours
and
I
generally
have
at
least
two
topics
for
our
conversation
and
I
just
presented,
I
send
them
materials
in
advance
to
review,
and
then
we
have
our
conversations
on
Tuesday
evenings
and
it's
very
candid.
D
It's
very
spirited
and-
and
we
don't
necessarily
agree,
and
so
what
I
do
is
I
take
notes
of
the
conversation
and
I'm
one
of
those
people
I'm
one
of
those
annoying
people
that
likes
to
repeat
what
people
say
to
ensure
that
I,
understood
and
and
under
it
got
their
perspective
done
so
I,
always
reiterate
what
I'm
hearing
the
feedback
from
our
work
group
members
are
and
then
I
draft
language,
and
then
we
review
it
at
next
meeting
and
sometimes
I
hit
it
on
the
mark
and
sometimes
I.
D
Don't
one
of
the
things
that
we
did,
that
I
thought
was
really
important
was
develop.
A
purpose
statement
because
I
think
having
a
purpose
statement
at
the
Forefront
of
this
ordinance
is
important
to
address
the
various
perspectives
about
oversight
and
making
it
Crystal
Clear.
What
the
panel
is
about
and
its
role
and
purpose-
and
that
was
a
collective
effort
and
we
have
a
really
great
draft
purpose
statement
from
kind
of
working
through
this
process.
D
Next
slide,
please
so.
We've
had
five
meetings
so
far
we
meet
on
Tuesdays
for
two
hours
and
I
try
to
really
keep
us
on
task
and
be
productive
in
those
two
hours,
because
obviously
this
you
know
we're
a
volunt,
the
volunteers
that
are
on
this
devoting
their
time
because
of
their
dedication
to
oversight
into
the
City
and
so
far
we
have
hit
some
pretty
pretty
big
topics.
Again.
Our
purpose
statement:
we've
talked
about
member
qualifications
unanimously.
D
The
connection
to
Boulder
was
very
important
to
every
single
member
in
the
work
group
and
figuring
out
how
we
tie
that
in
they
were
very,
very
much
wanted
to
ensure
the
student
representative
spots
on
the
panel
were
there
and
we
we
broadened
it
a
little
bit
to
to
ensure
that
it
Encompass
other
institutions
of
higher
education
throughout
the
area.
D
D
It
didn't
quite
hit
the
mark
on
that
draft,
so
we're
going
back
and
I'm
I'm
editing
the
draft
based
on
our
conversations
and
so
we're
reviewing
that
in
our
forthcoming
meeting
this
Tuesday
we've
talked
about
the
chief
providing
written
responses
to
the
panel,
and
then
we
talked
about
setting
up
potentially
setting
up
a
review.
Every
four
years
of
the
oversight
system
to
see
is
it
is
it?
Is
it
working
how
we
intend
it?
Is
it
efficient?
D
In
my
opinion,
this
is
helpful
to
ensure
that
we
address
things
that
come
up
and
to
kind
of
head
off
any
sort
of
issues
that
may
may
come
out
through
the
through
the
process,
because
over
time,
oversight
evolves
over
years,
and
so
this
is
a
way
to
to
anticipate
and
be
proactive
towards
that
evolution
next
slide,
please,
and
so
what
we
have
to
discuss
is
the
scope
of
the
panel,
for
example,
the
type
of
cases
they
should
be
reviewing
or
can
be
reviewing
this.
D
The
next
point
about
the
relationship
with
the
independent
police
monitor
is
very
important
to
me
as
a
former
monitor,
I
want
to
ensure
and
help
support
and
not
necessarily
guide,
but
give
perspective
about
how
important
that
relationship
is.
It's
collaborative
the
monitor
is
a
resource,
and
but
it's
separate
right
and
so
understanding
that
line
and
helping
them
to
understand
that
line
and
establish
that
line.
We
also
need
to
talk
about
duties
and
responsibilities
and
training.
The
training
one
is
important
and
I
alluded
to
this.
D
A
little
bit
earlier
is
that
the
current
ordinance
talks
about
training
that
is
established
by
the
monitor,
I
think
that's
important,
but
we
want
to
go
a
little
bit
a
step
further
in
terms
of
potentially
describing
training
that
it
should
occur
for
a
panelist
before
they
participate
in
case
review
or
take
a
vote
on
the
panel
and
then
also
kind
of
the
types
of
training
that
are
important
for
for
panel
members
to
to
receive
so,
for
example,
use
of
force
training
next
slide,
please.
D
So
in
our
timeline
on
our
August
1st
meeting
next
Tuesday,
we
are
assessing
our
progress
and
I
I
do
want
to
report
that
we
have
been
making
a
really
good
progress.
We
have
a
very
good
working
job.
We
still
have
some
some
way
to
go,
but
we
do
have
a
really
good
working
draft
and
we
anticipate
having
another
Community
event
towards
the
end
of
August
early
September
to
get
feedback
on
that
draft.
D
That
draft
obviously
will
have
to
go
through
review
with
the
city
manager
and
the
City
of
Turney,
and
then
we
anticipate
a
follow-up,
Council
briefings
and
first
reading
for
that
draft
and
then
October.
We
anticipate
a
second
reading
and
presentation
to
you
about
the
details
of
the
recommendations
and
I'll
go
into
that
further
in
the
next
slide.
D
Anticipate
to
bring
back
to
you,
September
october-ish
is
is
a
packet
and
a
packet
that
would
include
the
work
group
recommendations.
D
That
also
include
my
specific
recommendations
and
I
also
want
to
include
that
of
the
oir
group,
which
I
think
is
very
important.
As
you
know,
the
oir
group
is
the
current
interim
Monitor
and
so
has
been
the
inter-monitor
for
maybe
six
to
eight
months
now,
and
so
their
perspective
has
been
very
valuable
because
they've
been
in
the
position
and
they
have
recommendations
that
I
will
include
as
part
of
my
recommendations
and
then
also
the
summary
of
community
feedback.
I.
D
Think
it's
important
that
you
hear
not
only
the
feedback
that
we've
received
that
I've
received
and
the
panel
has
received
since
we
started
this
process,
but
also
the
feedback
specific
to
the
draft
recommendations.
D
So
that
will
be
included
and
then
I
also
think
that
you
know
it's
important
for
you
to
be
aware
and
understand
the
areas
of
disagreement,
and
so
I
will
delineate
that
for
you
and
talk
about
kind
of,
why
there's
a
disagreement
in
those
areas
and
what
the
various
positions
are,
because
I
think
it's
going
to
be
helpful
for
you
to
understand
those
areas,
as
you
know,
Community
more
likely
than
not
will
be
vocal
on
those
areas,
and
so
I
want
to
be
transparent
about
that
with
you
next
slide,
please,
and
so
that
is
the
general
summary
of
kind
of
where,
where
we
are
and
where
we've
gone
and
so
I'm
very
much
open
to
hearing
your
feedback,
particularly
about
any
areas
in
the
ordinance
that
you'd
like
us
to
look
more
closely
and
then
more
broadly
in
terms
of
oversight.
D
B
E
Thanks
thanks
for
we're
so
lucky
to
have
you
on
board,
and
we
really
appreciate
all
the
hard
work
you're
putting
into
this
and
and
I'm
disappointed.
We
couldn't
persuade
you
to
be
our
next
Police
monitor,
but
it's
like
we've
got
some
really
good
candidates.
I
have
two
questions
for
you
and
one
question
from
Nuria.
E
E
Remember
when
we
passed
the
ordinance
about
three
years
ago,
we
were
told
by
the
city
attorney's
office
that
it
was
somewhat
of
a
someone
of
a
model
ordinance
that
have
been
adopted
by
a
number
of
cities,
and
so
I
guess
I'd
be
kind
of
surprised
if
there's
a
lot
of
changes
that
are
needed
to
the
ordinance
itself,
so
I'd
like
to
get
a
sense
from
you
how
much
of
it
is
ordinance
drafting
that
needs
to
be
improved
and
how
much
of
it
is
is
really
implementation
of
of
already
pretty
good
ordinance.
D
D
I
think
you
know.
The
perfect
example
is
you
know
the
language
around
perceived
bias,
it's
not
something
that
I
would
have
recommended
to
put
in
an
ordinance.
So
that's
a
clear
example,
and
there
there
are
just
some
gaps.
F
D
On
you
could
tell
it's
very
well-intentioned,
but
it
it
needs
some
fine
tuning
which
will
give
Clarity
to
the
implementation,
because
it'll
be
easier
to
understand.
There
are
sections
of
the
ordinance
that
just
are
difficult
to
follow
and
understand,
and
so
this
revision
that
we're
going
through
collectively
will
help
help
streamline
it
a
little
bit
to
make
the
implementation
a
little
easier,
and
so
the
gaps
have
caused.
D
You
know
some,
you
know,
interpretation
disagreements
right,
and
so
we
want
to.
We
want
to
clean
that
up
and
so
I
I
would
folk.
My
priority
would
be
cleaning
up
and
fixing
the
things
that
need
to
be
fixed
in
the
ordinance
but
I'm
not
minimizing
some
of
the
changes
that
might
need
to
be
done
on
the
Implement
in
the
implementation
side
as
well.
So
it's
a
it's
a
collective
answer.
E
No
I
appreciate
that
sure
I'm
happy
to
say
I'm
happy
to
hear
you
say
that
a
lot
of
us
in
the
ordinance
I
understand
it's
a
little
bit
above,
but
ordinances
are
obviously
easier
to
fix
than
implementation
oftentimes,
and
so,
if
he
thinks
that
that,
if
you
think
that
improvements
are
our
ordinance
can
help
us
help
us
with
with
implementation,
because
it's
clear
that's
really
really
great.
To
hear
second
question
to
you.
E
Is
something
I've
always
kind
of
puzzled
by
ever,
since
we
put
this
in
place,
I'm
kind
of
puzzled
about
the
word
oversight
and
you
have
a
very
broad
experience
in
this
area
and
you've
talked
to
monitors
in
in
panels
around
the
country.
So
you
know
far
more
about
this
than
any
of
us
too,
but
I've
always
thought
about
kind
of
the
definition
of
the
word.
E
D
So
historically,
the
word
has
been
oversight.
Right
I
mean
it
comes
from
the
concept
of
having
Outsiders
oversee
the
police
department
right
in
that
context,
but
you're
right
I
mean,
generally
speaking,
civilian
oversight
is
more
in
an
advisory
capacity.
So
it's
a
very
rare
that
you
will
see
a
civilian
oversight
being
able
to
necessarily
dictate
what
a
police
department
does
that.
D
That's
that's
just
very
rare,
but
I
think
where
the
concept
comes
from
is
civilian
outside
of
the
police
department
having
the
ability
to
look
into
issues
in
the
police
department
that
affects
community
members,
and
so
it's
not
necessarily
a.
B
D
E
D
I
see
mostly
I,
don't
see
the
word
advisory
I
see
Commission
generally,
they
all
have
police
in
them,
and
we
we
had
the
community
police
review,
Commission
civilian
review
board.
We've
I've
seen
forgot
what
they
yeah
it
it
it.
D
It
varies
whether
or
not
oversight
is
in
the
name
of
the
panel
per
se,
but
it's
generally
in
the
name
of
the
office.
If
that
makes
sense,
it.
E
Sure
does
well,
you
know,
I'm
going
to
maybe
answer
one
of
your
questions,
which
is
one
of
the
stuff.
Would
you
like
to
see
what
would
you
like
to
see
from
you
as
you
prepare
for
for
October
I
I'd,
really
welcome
out
just
a
little
small
section
and
report
about
just
a
sampling
of
what
various
cities
call
it.
If
all
the
cities
call
oversight,
then
I
guess
that's
the
term
of
art
it
just.
E
And
then
quit
I'm
going
to
put
you
on
a
little
on
the
spot
and
feel
free
to
punt
on
this
one.
If,
if,
if
you
don't
want
to
answer
it,
I
know
that
you
introduced
to
the
community
about
two
or
three
weeks
ago,
three
finalists
for
the
for
the
police,
monitor
position.
I'm,
not
asking
me
if
you've
hired
anybody
yet,
but
but
what
I
was
going
to
ask
you
is,
is
because
the
police
monitor
is
obviously
gonna
need
to
live
with
whatever
Farah
and
Council
come
up
with.
E
Do
you
anticipate
that
wherever
you
ultimately
hire
as
police
monitor
might
be,
might
be
on
board
or
at
least
be
identified
so
that
that
person
can
work
with
with
pharah
in
the
last
stages
of
of
this
series
of
recommendations
so
that
they
don't
just
show
up
on
the
first
day
and
have
an
ordinance
handed
to
them
that
they
may
be
didn't?
Have
any
role
in.
C
Thank
you,
councilmember.
Never
on
the
spot,
I
appreciate
it
and
I
will
say
that
I
do.
It
is
something
that
came
up
in
the
various
interviews,
as
we
were
thinking
about.
Timing
I
hope
to
be
able
to
announce
something
very
shortly
here,
but
in
the
conversations
with
each
of
the
candidates-
and
you
are
right-
we
were
very
lucky
on
this-
go
around
to
have
extraordinary
folks
and
I.
C
Think
any
of
them
would
make
terrific
monitors
as
we
move
forward,
but
we
did
talk
about
their
ability
to
really
work
with
pharah.
We've
actually
talked
to
Farah
about
staying
longer
and
working
with
the
new
monitor
as
well,
since
she
has
been
able
to
gain
new
insights
into
what
we're
doing
as
a
community
and
with
the
panel.
So
we
hope
there
will
be
synergies
in
the
future
with
both.
E
G
Thank
you
so
much
I
have
a
couple
a
couple,
a
couple
of
questions
and
as
Bob
was
talking-
and
you
were
talking,
para
I-
want
to
start
by
saying
thank
you
for
the
presentation,
but
I
do
based
on
the
presentation
that
you
give.
It
appears
to
me
that
you're
also
working
on
the
revision
of
the
ordinance
and
I'm,
not
questioning
your
qualification
or
anything
because
I
from
what
I
heard
is
that
you
know
you
have
a
lot
of
experience
in
your
field.
A
D
Am
an
attorney
and
I
have
experienced
a
lot
of
policy
experience
and
drafting
legislation,
so
this
is
something
that
I'm
very,
very
familiar
with,
and
I
I
actually
did
this
in
Austin
also.
C
Thank
you,
council
member
I
also
say
that
we
have
Deputy
City
attorney,
Aaron
Poe
on
the
work
group
as
well,
and
so
we
have
City
attorney's
office
sort
of
intimately
involved
as
well.
Thank
you
for.
H
Now
did
you
want
to
jump
in
yes,
if
I
may
jump
in
Aaron
and
Farah
are
working
closely
together
and
we
have
really
full
confidence
in
pharah
in
her
abilities
and
her
recommendations,
and
then
Aaron
is
there
to
ensure
that
the
recommendations
work
with
the
rest
of
our
code
and
with
the
originating
intent
of
of
of
this
panel.
G
You
mentioned
the
police
monitor
it
would
be
best
for
them
to
be
a
liaison,
as
opposed
to
being
on
the
panel
and
I
wanted
to
you
to
explain
a
little
bit
more
as
to.
Why
is
that
important
I
mean
I
looked
at
the
code
and
when
I
read
it
or
at
least
when
I
was
looking
at
it,
I
didn't
get
a
sense
of
their
involvement
as
a
member
of
the
panel,
but
I
wanted
you
to
explain
that
a
little
bit
more.
For
me.
D
Yeah,
so
they
are
a
non-voting
member,
as
the
ordinance
stands
right
now,
they're
a
non-voting
member
of
the
of
the
panel,
and
so
it's
caused
some
logistical
issues
for
the
panel
in
terms
of
their
ability
to
meet
in
a
non-public
setting.
So,
for
example,
there's
a
co-chairs,
and
so
whenever
they
meet
with
the
monitor
it
has
to
be
a
public
meeting.
D
That's
just
not
effective,
so
that's
one
kind
of
technical
barrier
that
it
has
caused.
But
fundamentally
you
really
don't
need
to
have
the
monitor
as
part
of
the
panel.
Generally
speaking,
the
monitor
serves
as
a
resource
and
to
the
panel
in
terms
of
being
like
a
subject
matter:
expert,
helping
support
them
in
the
review
of
cases
providing
guidance
being
that
connection
to
you
know,
City
resources
and
they.
D
And
also
it
helps
to
maintain
the
separation
right
because
you
have.
The
pant,
like
Boulder,
has
a
hybrid
system
of
oversight.
So
it
has
the
monitor
right
that
provides
monitoring
of
police
misconduct
cases
and
then
it
has
essentially
a
review
board,
and
so
it
allows
there
to
be
a
line
between
the
roles
to
have
the
monitor,
obviously
be
the
Monitor
and
then
the
panel
being
separate.
So
there
is
collaborative
right,
they're
working
in
a
parallel
fashion,
but
when
you
have
the
met
the
monitor
on
the
panel,
it
blurs
that
line.
D
That's
really
unnecessary
because
it
it
really
should
function
separately,
but
in
a
collaborative
fashion.
I
hope
that
provides
a
little
bit
more.
G
Another
question
that
I
had
for
you
was
about
the
size
of
the
panel
I,
didn't
hear
you
talk
about
that
a
little
bit
and
I
wanted
to
hear.
Do
you
think
the
sizeable
panel
here
is
it's
in
line
with
the
size
of
panels
in
other
places?
Is
it
too
big?
Is
it
too
small.
D
G
D
and
so
for
a
size,
a
city,
the
size
of
Boulder,
with
the
size
of
your
Police
Department,
it
is
large
but
I
have
a
colleague
in
oh
gosh
in
Albany
New
York,
their
panel
is
11..
You
know
the
panel
most
panels
are
about
you
know.
Austin
was
about
a
million
people.
We
had
a
panel.
D
We
went
from
seven
to
ten,
so
so
I
I
don't
want
to
give
across
the
pers
the
the
impression
that
I'm
saying
that
the
panel
is
too
big,
because
the
thing
about
oversight,
that's
really
important,
is
that
you
have
to
develop
your
own
recipe.
So
if
the
recipe
for
Boulder
calls
for
a
bigger
panel,
you
know
even
though
you're
a
relatively
small
town,
then
that's
okay,
that
that's
the
recipe
for
Boulder
right
and
so
so
they'll.
D
G
You
I
have
one
more
question
to
you
more
and
I'll
be
done.
I
promise,
oh
Tara,
just
letting
you
know
you
mentioned
the
SOP,
which
I
thought.
Oh
that's
great,
that
you
you
mentioned
that
and
that's
part
of
the
process.
Streamlining
Effectiveness
and
accountability.
That's
great,
and
thank
you
for
that,
and
you
mentioned
discipline
and
I
was
wondering
because
my
understanding
with
the
police
department
is
very
different.
You
know
police
departments
around
the
state
in
the
nation
is
its
accountability,
looks
different
and
it's
is
is
not.
D
Yeah,
so
essentially,
what
I
was
referring
to
is
the
panel
is
able
to
make
discipline
recommendations
right,
and
so
it
would
be
important
to
have
a
standing
operating
procedure
that
delineates
what
that
process
looks
like.
So,
for
example,
after
upon
case
review,
the
panel
determine
you
know,
makes
a
recommendation.
That
recommendation
is
sent
to
the
chief,
the
chief
reviews,
it
and
it'll
say
you
know
within
a
certain
amount
of
time
the
chief
responds,
for
example.
D
We
could
take
it
a
step
further
if
the
chief
disagrees
with
the
recommendation,
perhaps
there's
a
meeting
to
discuss
right.
So
those
are
the
types
of
things
that
are
more
appropriate
to
be
delineated
in
a
standard
operating
procedure
than
to
put
in
an
order.
So
that's
what
I
mean
in
terms
of
discipline
is
the
process
of
what
the
panel
and
the
police
department
agree
to
on
how
they
will
handle
discipline
recommendations.
G
Thank
you
so
much
I,
just
wanted
to
add
just
to
finish.
I
will
not
ask
any
more
questions
or
make
any
other
comments.
You
mentioned.
Training
and
I
was
wondering
if
this
training
will
be
paid
because
again,
the
panel
members
are
community
members
and
some
of
them
are
not
wealthy
and
if
we
are
putting
training
on
them
or
to
make
their
work
more
effective,
what
support
are
we
providing
them?
You
don't
have
to
enter
now,
but
I
hope
you'll.
Keep
that
in
mind
as
you're
moving
forward
as
part
of
this
process.
Thank
you.
F
Thank
you,
Tara
and
thank
you
Farah
for
all
the
hard
work.
It's
it's
really
been
terrific
to
to
meet
with
you
and
discuss
these
issues
with
you.
Just
a
couple
of
questions
you
you
mentioned
that
there
is
not
a
uniform
understanding
of
the
role
and
responsibilities
of
the
panel
among
the
people.
You
have
been
talking
to.
F
D
So
it
is,
this
is
not
an
easy
task
and
I
went
through
it
personally,
because
it
is
really
about
putting
an
engagement
about
and
informing
the
community
right,
and
it's
not
just
about
the
panel.
The
panel
100
needs
to
be
educated
about
its
role
and
its
purview,
but
the
community
needs
to
understand
it
too.
So
what
happens
is
that
Community
always
thinks
that
panels
and
monitors
and
oversight
systems
can
do
more
than
they
really
can
right,
and
so
it's
about
really
explaining
in
simple
terms
what
the
purview
is
right.
D
It's
going
back
to
the
council
member's
original
point
about
a
lot
of
what
the
role
of
the
panel
is
is
advisory
right.
There's,
there's
a
misconception
that
this
particular
panel
can
do
things
that
it
just
cannot
do
right
it
legally.
It
just
cannot
do,
and
so
essentially,
what
I
think
has
to
happen-
and
this
takes
a
lot
of
time
and
a
lot
of
community
engagement
is
and
it's
going
to
have
to
be
collaborative
with
them.
D
Monitor
and
the
panel
is
really
going
out
there
and
doing
an
information
campaign
to
community
I
shared
an
infographic
that
we
use
in
Austin
with
the
with
the
panel
and
the
city's
com
scene
did
a
great
job
with
creating
something
similar
for
Boulder
and
that's
something
that
just
needs
to
be
widely
distributed
to
to
ensure
that
people
have
the
information
not
only
about
you
know,
you
have
a
police
oversight
system.
D
So,
if
you
have,
you
know
a
a
an
incident
where
to
go,
but
also
know
like
what
the
parameters
of
you
know:
the
oversight
that
you're
coming
to
what
they
can
do,
and
so
that
for
me,
was
key
because
you
will
hear
Community
say
they
don't
have
teeth,
they
don't
have
teeth.
Well,
it's
not
necessarily
about
teeth.
It's
really
about
having
an
entity
outside
the
police
department
being
able
to
look
into
further
and
providing
a
resource
for
community
members.
D
F
Thank
you.
There
was
also
a
statement
in
one
of
the
slides
that
it
was
thought
that
the
panel
should
be
more
representative
of
the
community.
Can
you
explain
that
a
little
bit
I
mean
to
what
extent
was
our
existing
panel
deficient
in
being
a
a
picture
of
the
community.
D
Farm
that
we
had
at
the
Boulder,
Boulder,
Library
and
so
I
I
think
that
I
think
it
was
coming
from
the
perspective
just
the
diversity
on
on
the
panel
and
making
sure
that
it's
more
reflective
in
that
way.
That
is
what
my
recollection
of
the
con
the
the
context
of
that
statement
that
was
made
and.
F
Look
the
reason
I
ask
is
I'm
not
sure
that
that's
exactly
what
we
want.
I
mean
Boulder
is
a
as
an
88
white
community
and
given
the
purposes
and
goals
of
providing
police
oversight
and
the
communities
we're
looking
to
serve
and
providing
that
I'm,
not
sure
that
you
want
to
be
purely
reflective
of
the
demographics
of
Boulder,
I
I
think
you
want
to
go
a
little
bit
beyond
that.
F
And
my
very
last
question
is,
you
said:
there's
a
lot
of
concern
over
the
the
concept
of
perceived
bias.
Can
you
clarify
a
little
bit
because,
to
the
extent
that
the
council
is
going
to
be
asked
to
approve
members
to
the
panel,
there
have
to
be
some
bases
for
doing
it
without
being
entirely
arbitrary
and
bias
would
seem
to
be
to
me
to
be
a
a
useful
indicator
of
future
performance
on
the
on
the
panel?
Is
there
an
alternative
basis
for
deciding
on
the
on
the
merits
of
a
prospective
nominee.
D
Yeah
so
I
think
the
the
key
here
is
the
language
of
perceived
bias,
because
even
the
word
perception
is
very
gray
and
at
any
given
point,
we
all
have
some
level
of
bias
and
the
perception
we
all
have
different
perceptions,
and
so
that
type
of
language,
that
is
a
a
a
principle
in
an
ordinance,
is
challenging
right
and
at
any
given
point.
D
Potentially,
that
argument
could
be
made
for
any
of
the
panel
members
right
and
so
essentially,
what
you
see
in
terms
of
criteria
for
oversight,
Community,
volunteer
panel
members
is
impartiality,
is
objectivity
that
type
of
language.
That
is
a
little
bit
more
clear
because
I'm
not
quite
sure
if
there
was
a
definition
sector.
There
is
a
definition
section
like
how
we
would
Define
perceived
bias
right
like
it's,
just
something
that
I
think
should
be
removed,
and
we
should
focus
on
other
criteria.
That
is
clear
and
less
gray
in
terms
of
its
interpretation.
F
F
D
Because
I
think
that
you
and
I
may
disagree
on
what
substantial
is
right
and
so
I
don't
know
if
that
would
be
an
alternative.
That
would
help
us
get
in
the
right
direction.
Well,.
F
There's
always
the
possibility
of
disagreement
on
whatever
standards
we
adopt,
but
it
seems
to
me
you
need
to
have
some
standards
that
allow
us
to
render
a
judgment
as
to
whether
or
not
somebody
is
going
to
be
a
good
member
of
the
panel
or
not,
and
if
perceived
bias
is
not
going
to
work.
That's
fine,
but
we
ought
to
then
figure
out
something
else
that
that
does
and
all
of
them
are
going
to
be
subjective
in
some
fashion.
F
They're
always
going
to
be
just
judge
the
council,
but
I
will
leave
it
to
you
to
define
something
that
that
you're
comfortable
with
having
us
exercise
that
judgment
and
you
know,
make
those
determinations
and
again
thanks
for
all
the
work.
That's
it's
been
terrific
I'm.
I
Thank
you
can
I
just
offer
the
one
conquera.
This
is
amazing.
Work
and
I.
Just
I
really
appreciate
what
you're
doing
it
feels
like
this
is
starting
us
on
a
journey
of
restoring
a
little
bit
of
trust
in
the
community
and
just
at
large
as
well.
Just
by
creating
a
space
for
healthy,
robust
dialogue
and
I
know,
that's
not
an
easy
thing
to
do.
It's
really.
So.
Thank
you.
Thank
you
for
that.
I
So
one
of
the
questions
that
I
had
was
just
in
thinking
about
areas
to
explore
a
little
more.
This
idea
of
training
you
know
keeps
coming
up,
I
think
in
in
most
people's
comments.
So
far,
and
what
I'm
wondering
about
is:
is
there
any
opportunity
for
this
group
or
another
working
group
to
provide
some
feedback
on
the
training?
You
know
to
have
any
kind
of
ownership
in
the
development
of
that
training,
I
bet
and
what
what
onboarding
looks
like
I,
don't
know
if
it's
the
panel.
I
That
would
make
me
do
that
work
or
something,
but
it
feels
like
an
area
for
me
where
having
some
buy-in
from
everybody
could
be
helpful
in
getting
us
to
a
place
where
people
are
feeling.
You
know,
they've
got
some
trust
in
in
how
people
are
approaching
this
work
and
what
they're
going
to
be
doing.
Yeah.
D
I
definitely
think
that
there's
room
for
that
not
only
from
the
particularly
the
panda
members
I've
been
on
it,
but
also
our
newer
panel
members
just
for
their
perspective
in
terms
of
how
they
how
they
have
brought
on,
but
I
also
think
if
it's
not
the
work
group
or
just
some
Community
feedback
in
terms
of
you
know
what
they
think.
It's
important
that
the
the
panel
know
about
so,
for
example,
in
the
community
session
that
we
had
in
June.
D
One
of
the
feedback,
I
remember,
is
ensuring
that
not
only
the
selection
committee,
if
there's
a
selection
committee,
but
also
the
Pano
members,
have
you
know
some
level
of
understanding
about
law
enforcement
and
so
I
think
you
know
the
I
feel
like
that
kind
of
leads
to
your
point
a
little
bit
about
having
some
people
look
at
collaboratively.
Look
at.
You
know
what
the
training
could
entail
and
what's
important
for
not
only
panel
members
but
also
potentially
a
selection
committee
to
know
ahead
of
time.
I
Yeah,
thank
you
and
then
the
other
thing
I
was
wondering
if
you
could
just
speak
to
a
little
bit.
More
is
I
know
that
most
of
the
time
in
the
panelist
history,
the
monitor
the
chief,
the
panel
agreed
on
what
what
an
outcome
should
be.
What
I'm
wondering
about
is
just
is
there
work
on
kind
of
what
the
grievance
process
for
lack
of
a
better
word.
You
know
that
that
place
where
there's
not
that
agreement,
which
happens
less,
that
feels
like
it,
can
foster
more
Discord.
I
D
I
didn't
want
to
really
hit
the
sensitive
topics
in
the
beginning,
and
so
now
that
our
group
has
built
trust
I'm
hitting
the
more
kind
of
controversial
ones,
but
that
is
on
the
list,
because
that
has
been
feedback
that
I've
gotten
in
terms
of
when
there's
a
discipline
on
on
a
disagreement
on
discipline
kind
of
what
the
Avenue
is
for
that
and
it's
it's
a
it's
a
little
tricky
because,
generally
speaking,
the
chief
has
the
final
say.
D
However,
I
do
think
that,
in
my
experience,
when
I
had
a
disagreement
with
the
chief,
we
sat
down
and
talked
about
it
now.
I
still
walked
out
disagreeing
with
the
chief,
but
I
sat
down
and
talked
about
it.
I
understood,
disrespective
and
then
I
was
always
able
to
memorialize
my
you
know
disagreement
and
why,
in
a
general
term,
like
not
disclosing
any
sort
of
confidential
information,
I
was
able
to
obviously
share
that
with
the
city
manager
and
make
it
public.
I
Thank
you
for
that
and
then
my
other
one
was
I
just
saw
something
about
outside
Council
and
and
looking
for
outside
Counsel
on
there.
I
was
just
wondering
if
you
could
speak
to
that
issue,
a
little
more
and
then
Maria
and
Teresa.
This
may
be,
you
know
place
for
you
as
well
that
I
I,
don't
I,
don't
know
that
our
other
boards
have
access
to
something
like
that
too.
So
I
was
just
wondering
if
you
could
just
speak
to
that
General
topic.
D
So
it's
just
something:
that's
come
up
pretty
much
in
all
my
conversations
with
various
community
members
panel
members
is
that
when
there's
a
conflict
of
interest
or
some
sort
of
disagreement
will
can
the
panel
have
access
to
an
outside
Council
in
some
oversight
boards?
You
see,
you
see
it,
but
for
the
most
part,
oversight
boards
are
connected
to
a
municipality
right,
a
city
system,
and
so,
if
they
are
I'll
just
give
my
experiences
as
as
an
example
in
that
I
think
I
may
have
had
the
opportunity
to
it.
D
I
didn't
necessarily
use
it,
because
I
had
a
specific
attorney
assigned
to
my
office.
That
was
a
City
attorney
that
was
separate
than
the
attorney
at
the
at
the
in
the
in
the
in
the
city
attorney's
office.
However,
if,
for
whatever
reason,
I
I
did
need
an
outside
counsel,
it
would
have
been
retained
through
the
city
attorney's
office.
It's
not
like
I
would
have
had
the
opportunity
to
go.
Retain
a
council
on
my
own
as
the
police
monitor,
or
particularly
our
our
review
commission,
wouldn't
have
been
able
to
do
that
either.
D
D
But
you
know
just
in
a
realistic
fashion:
I'm
not
anticipating
it'll
come
up,
but
it
is
something
that
may
come
up
where
there
is
a
conflict
of
interest
or
some
sort
of
difference
of
opinion.
Where
you
know
Council
may
be
needed.
It's
not
something.
That's
unusual
and
oversight,
but
the
key
here
is
really
educating
community
and
panel
members
of
what
that
process
looks
like
in
in
the
case
where
that,
where
it
may
be
needed.
H
Yeah
I'm
happy
to
jump
in
here,
so
it's
not
uncommon
for
the
city
attorney's
office
to
represent
different
interests.
For
example,
the
council
can
think
about
a
situation
where
planning
board
has
a
recommendation.
That's
different
than
staff
and
Council
needs
to
be
represented.
We
handle
that
all
the
time
it's
that
is
not
at
all
uncommon.
C
I'll
just
share
too
I
have
I,
have
full
faith
in
our
city.
Attorney's
office
I
believe
that
they
represent
all
of
our
departments
and
all
of
our
boards
and
commissions,
and
each
and
every
one
of
you
faithfully
and
neutrally
and
are
able
to
hold
where
there
are
differing
interests.
It
happens
as
Teresa
says
all
the
time
and
where
we
have
capacity
issues
or
whether
we
need
additional
expertise
in
a
matter
or
whether
we
have
a
conflict.
C
There
are
times
when
the
city
attorney
does
go
outside
and
hire
a
council,
but
it
is
hired
through
the
city,
attorney's
office
I,
believe
it
is
problematic
to
have
an
external
Council
separate
from
the
city
that
potentially
could
come
back
and
have
a
differing
opinion
and
and
potentially
sue
us
and
involve
Us
in
litigation
for
our
own
work.
C
I
Thank
you
I
appreciate
that,
and
just
just
one
one
quick
follow-up
there
to
Vera
with
the
you
know.
You
mentioned
that
sometimes
other
other
cities
have
done
this
a
little
differently
where
maybe
they
have
access
to
outside
Council.
Has
that
typically
been
in
these
situations
like
Marianne
Teresa
are
talking
about
when,
when
there's
there's
a
conflict
of
interest-
or
you
know
some
some
area
of
expertise-
that's
needed
is
that
the
times
when,
when
they
have
outside
counsel,
rather
than
being
like
a
separate
attorney,
separate
attorney
from
outside
the
city.
D
B
Is
that
it
for
the
questions
then,
because
now
we're
going
to
move
on
to
pharah's
two
questions
to
us
for
comments.
The
first
one
has
to
do
with
the
ordinance.
Are
there
additional
areas
of
Jordan
city
council
would
like
to
see
revised
or
further
explored,
and
the
second
one
has
to
do
with
police
oversight
panels
in
general?
Are
there
any
specific
priorities
or
areas?
B
J
Yeah
Sarah
I
just
want
to
offer
an
enormous.
Thank
you.
I
feel
like
we
are
on
the
right
track.
With
this
work
and
having
you
lead.
It
I
think
this
enormously
huge
part
of
why
we
are
now
on
track.
So
very
grateful
for
your
work.
J
Also
very
grateful
to
the
working
group
members
who
are
engaging
in
the
spirited
debate
and
discussion,
so
I
do
feel
like
we're
we're
getting
getting
to
a
good
place,
so
I
don't
have
additional
Focus
areas,
I
I,
think
you're
doing
all
the
right
stuff
and
I'm
very
much
looking
forward
to
the
next
steps
and
adopting
the
ordinance
changes
later
on
this
year.
K
Well,
it
sounds
like
we're
on
the
ditto
train
here:
yeah
fair,
just
all
of
the
conversation
and
building
to
where
we
are
I
think
has
been
the
in
the
way
we've
done.
This
was
such
great
intentionality
I
think
is
really
important.
K
You
know,
we've
had
some
rocky
road
and
I'm
really
helpful
to
I'm
grateful
that
we
have
an
opportunity
to
sort
of
move
that
over
and
get
to
a
place,
as
Nicole
said,
of
trying
to
build
back
that
trust
which
isn't
necessary
for
all
parties
in
this.
So
thank
you
for
helping
lead
that
way
and
I
look
forward
to
diving
into
some
of
the
more
specifics
as
those
recommendations
come
through
and
you
continue
the
work
so
I.
K
Else
I
agree
with
our
mayor
on
this
and
sort
of
where
we're
at
where
we're
headed,
but
just
yeah
I
want
to
extend
a
lot
of
gratitude
and
you'll
hear
many
more
thanks
as
though
we
we
continue
to
visit
and
go
through
this.
So
thank
you
so
much.
L
Thank
you,
yeah
I'm,
gonna
Echo.
A
lot
of
that
I
think
that,
for
me,
I
appreciate
the
way
you
have
organized
these
conversations
to
have
to
help
build
trust
and
create
a
lot
of
transparency
in
the
process.
I
think
that
you
know
in
terms
of
specific
priorities,
I
just
keep
expanding
on
that
I.
Think
that
that's
really
foundational
to
making
this
work
well
and
if
there's
other
areas
that
we
should
be
exploring
I'm
open
to
that.
L
M
M
My
feeling
is
that
you
and
others
working
on
this
are
the
expert
and
have
really
knocked
it
out
of
the
park,
thinking
through
what
we
need
to
be
looking
at
and
considering
so,
nothing
to
add,
appreciate
it
and
looking
forward
to
seeing
the
final
recommendations
and
then
weighing
in.
Thank
you
thanks.
B
I
Thanks
I'm
sorry,
I
thought
we
were
answering
these
questions
before
so
Farah
just
to
quickly
summarize
just
the
training
processes,
I
think
an
area
of
emphasis
for
me
and
then
that
for
lack
of
a
better
word
grievance
process
and
then
the
only
other
thing
is
just
and
I
know.
You
mentioned
this
as
well
having
some
sort
of
Cadence
for
ongoing
revisiting
this
ordinance,
and
you
know
coming
back
to
it
over
time.
I
I
F
Yeah,
just
one
quick
request:
if
I
might
as
part
of
your
report,
can
you
do
a
little
bit
of
a
survey
of
what
other
cities
have
been
doing,
so
we
can
look
at
statutes
and
procedures
comparatively
in
terms
of
scope
of
the
authority
of
their
panels
number
of
members
of
their
panels.
You
know
how
they
conduct
their
business.
It's
always
nice
to
be
able
to
put
this
into
a
context
to
see
what
other
municipalities
are
doing.
D
Yeah
absolutely
I
I
have
that
already
looking
at
comparative
cities
and
so
I
that
was
part
of
my
pre-research
with
going
on
so
that
that's
actually
an
easy
one.
Okay.
B
C
You
everyone
wow,
thank
you
you're
rocking
it
councilmember
weiner,
it
wouldn't
be
a
meeting
with
Council.
If
we
weren't
talking
about
something
in
pnds
and
use
tables
are
up,
they
have
been
a
topic
of
lots
of
work
and
I
will
ask
Lisa
to
introduce
herself
and
just
thank
her
in
advance,
because
Lisa
has
a
way
of
presenting
these
issues
super
clearly
super
crisply
and
I
am
hopeful
and
assumed
that
this
will
be
no
different,
So
Lisa
I
give
it
to
you.
N
Thanks
so
much
Nuria
all
right
good
evening,
council
members,
my
name
is
Lisa
hood
and
I
am
a
senior
planner
in
planning
and
development
services.
You
all
are
very
familiar
with
the
use
table
and
standards
project
by
now,
but
I'm
excited
to
be
here
to
talk
about
the
third
and
final
ordinance
and
module
of
this
project.
I'll
provide
an
update
of
where
we
are
with
that
with
the
project
and
we'll
chat
about
the
neighborhood
center
changes
that
are
Central
to
this
third
module.
N
An
overview
of
the
presentation
for
you
tonight,
I'll
go
back.
I
know
you
have
lots
of
things
going
on,
so
just
give
a
quick
refresher
on
the
project
and
some
of
the
backgrounds
and
then
we'll
dive
into
module.
Three
I'll
talk
about
the
focused
scope
that
we
have
for
this.
This
ordinance
that
some
I'll
give
an
overview
of
some
of
the
past
input.
We've
gotten
in
the
past
and
then
I'll
give
a
preliminary
summary
of
the
engagement
that
we've
been
doing
over
this
summer.
N
Then
the
way
I've
organized
this
presentation
is
really
aligned
with
the
questions
for
Council
from
the
memo,
so
I
kind
of
have
it.
Where
I
have
introductory
slide
about
the
first
question
and
then
a
summary
about
the
public
input,
that's
relevant
and
then
maybe
pause
for
questions
and
if
and
Tara,
if
you're,
okay,
with
pausing
there
and
kind
of
going
topic
by
topic,
we
can
do
it
that
way
or
I
can
go
all
the
way
through,
whichever
you
prefer.
B
N
Yeah,
that's
how
it's
planned
so,
okay,
great!
So
we'll
do
it
that
way,
so
starting
off
with
the
the
refresher
on
the
background,
so
you
all
have
seen
these
initial
goals
for
the
use
table
and
standards
projects
project
many
times
we
are
intending
to
simplify
and
streamline
the
regulations
related
to
the
use
tan
table
and
standards
in
the
land
use
code,
create
making
it
more
predictable
and
certain
and
providing
more
certainty.
It's
a
part
of
the
code,
that's
been
very
complex
for
a
very
long
time.
N
Obviously,
we've
made
a
lot
of
improvements
with
the
prior
modules
of
work,
but
there's
still
more
to
do
and
then
this
module
is
really
focused
on
aligning
the
use
table
with
the
Boulder
Valley
comprehensive
plan.
So
we've
been
doing
a
lot
of
Engagement
with
the
community
over
several
years
and
also
focused
in
the
last
couple
of
months
to
try
to
identify
where
there
are
gaps
between
what
the
land
use
code
is
allowing
and
what
people
want
to
actually
see
in
the
community.
N
Just
a
reminder
that
this
project
is
really
really
targeted
just
on
the
use
table
and
standard,
so
it
doesn't
involve
reassessing
the
comprehensive
plan
policies.
It's
really
intended
to
implement
the
adoptive
plan
and
it's
focused
on
the
use
table
and
standards
only
so
this
means
that
the
it
doesn't
include
changes
to
the
form,
bulk
or
intensity
standards.
So
that's
things
like
setbacks,
height
floor
area
ratio.
It
doesn't
get
into
how
a
building
looks.
N
It
really
just
focuses
on
the
businesses
that
are
inside
that
that
building
or
the
uses
also
no
changes
to
the
development
standards.
So
things
like
parking
signs
lighting,
it
really
is
focused
on
the
use
table
just
a
background.
The
use
table
and
standards
project
has
been
going
on
since
2018
when
planning
board
first
identified
it
as
a
priority.
We
finished
phase
one
in
2019.
The
project
was
paused
for
a
bit
during
the
pandemic,
and
then
we
restarted
it
in
2022
working
on
the
phase
two
part
of
the
project
and
we've
been
working
on
it.
N
The
last
two
years
phase
two,
as
you
know,
is
split
into
what
we
are
calling
three
different
modules.
So
you
all
adopted
the
ordinance
for
module,
one
which
was
the
technical
updates
and
functional
fixes
back
in
June
of
last
year,
and
then
in
February
of
this
year,
you
adopted
the
the
second
ordinance
for
module,
two
related
to
industrial
areas,
and
that
was
the
one
where
we
were
intending
to
implement.
N
The
comprehensive
plan
policies
related
to
adding
a
diverse
mix
of
uses
in
our
industrial
areas
and
kind
of
a
similar
intent
is
for
module
3
as
well,
making
sure
that
we're
allowing
a
diverse
mix
of
uses
in
our
neighborhood
centers
and
with
access
from
our
neighborhoods,
so
I'll
get
right
into
module.
Three,
which
we
are
calling
neighborhoods
I
wanted
to
talk
a
little
bit
about
the
scope
of
the
project
and
the
upcoming
or
forthcoming
ordinance
related
to
it.
When
we
last
talked
we,
we
actually
did
talk
about
module.
Three.
N
N
We've
decided
to
really
focus
the
scope
purely
on
the
neighborhood
center
areas,
which
I'll
get
into
on
later
slides,
but
those
are
areas
that
don't
have
residential
zoning,
so
it's
really
focusing
on
business
and
mixed
use,
zoning
primarily
and
not
making
changes
in
the
residential
zoning
districts
and
the
reason
for
that
is
based
on
the
guidance
from
a
working
group
and
discussions
and
the
discussion
with
study
session
or
at
the
previous
study
session
at
the
last
summer
or
last
summer.
N
It
really
seems
like
that
conversation
there's
a
lot
going
on
with
residential
zoning
right
now.
Obviously,
the
state
had
some
potential
changes
coming
up.
We've
got
a
lot
of
other
projects
that
are
impacting
residential
areas
and
I
think
that
this
is
going
to
be
a
really
big
topic
for
upcoming,
comprehensive
Plan,
update
and
I.
N
We
could
get
more
into
the
form
and
bulk
standards
and
development
standards
like
parking
standards
and
things
like
that.
So
it
felt
like
it
was
a
natural
fit
to
focus
on
the
neighborhood
centers
for
this
module.
Three
finish
the
use
table
project
and
in
focusing
on
the
neighborhood
centers.
It
also
allows
us
to
support
the
walkable
neighborhoods
concept,
because
all
of
those
walkable
neighborhoods
surround
the
neighborhood
center
so
by
making
sure
that
the
neighborhood
centers
are
providing
the
services
that
people
need.
We
are
improving
walkability
of
neighborhoods
throughout
Boulder.
N
So
that's
where
we
came
up
with
the
focus
areas
that
I
talked
about
in
the
memo
and
what
the
questions
are
focused
on
for
the
the
questions
for
you
tonight.
So
we've
kind
of
dubbed
this,
the
walkable
neighborhoods
part
of
the
project
and
we're
intending
to
remove
barriers
in
the
codes
for
uses
businesses,
housing
that
people
want
to
have
nearby
in
their
neighborhood
centers
and
still
supporting
that
15
15-minute
neighborhood
concept,
where
people
can
have
access
to
the
services
that
they
need
by
walking
biking
or
taking
Transit
within
15
minutes
of
their
home.
N
This
again
is
really
intended
to
align
the
use
table
with
the
comprehensive
plan
policies.
I'll
go
into
the
specific
policies
we're
intending
to
implement
on
a
couple
later,
slides
and
then
also
going
back
to
how
how
many
years
this
project
has
been
going
on.
We've
gotten
a
lot
of
input
over
the
years
of
this
project
that
have
really
built
on
and
allowed
us
to
identify
the
specific
opportunities
where
we
could
Target
changes.
N
That
would
make
a
big
difference
to
the
neighborhood
centers.
So
with
all
that,
we've
landed
on
four
main
areas
of
focus,
so
the
first
is
restaurants.
The
second
is
duplexes
and
Townhomes.
N
The
third
is
vehicle
related
uses
and
the
fourth
one
is
kind
of
miscellaneous
other
changes
that
could
support
that
15-minute
neighborhood
concept,
and
so
that's
how
the
memo
is
organized
and
that
presentation
will
be
organized
as
well,
but
I
did
want
to
get
a
little
more
give
you
a
little
more
background
on
the
neighborhood
center
concept,
so
this
comes
from
the
comprehensive
plan.
It's
actually
something
that's
been
in
in
some
version
in
the
comprehensive
plan
for
several
decades
identifying
these
neighborhood
centers.
N
This
is
the
map,
that's
in
our
current
comprehensive
plan
and
the
neighborhood
centers
that
have
been
identified,
so
many
of
them
are
kind
of
the
big
shopping
centers
that
you
would
might
think
of,
but
there's
lots
of
different
flavors
and
types
of
neighborhood
centers
around
the
community.
So
obviously,
North
Broadway
is
going
to
look
pretty
different
from
base
Mar
they're
they're,
not
all
One,
of
a
Kind.
So
are
there
not?
They
are
all
one
of
a
kind
they're,
not
all
the
same.
They
have
different
characters.
N
So
the
interesting
part
of
doing
these
land
use
code
updates
is
kind
of
translating
the
goals
and
policies
that
are
in
the
comprehensive
plan
to
the
actual.
You
know
where
the
rubber
hits
the
road
regulation
in
the
land
use
code.
So
we
took
this
map
of
the
neighborhood
centers
and
translated
it
to
what
would
that
look
like
in
terms
of
zoning
districts
and
how
would
that
impact
zoning
so
that
we
can
focus
those
changes
on
the
zoning
districts
within
the
neighborhood
centers?
N
And
that
gives
you
this
map,
which
shows
the
zoning
districts
that
are
located
within
those
neighborhood
centers.
So
that's
where
we
were
able
to
Target
the
and
focus
the
the
set
of
changes
for
this
module
3
part
of
the
project,
so
it
looks
mostly
primarily
at
the
business
zones,
which
are
the
zones
that
start
with
b
the
downtown
zones
which
are
DT
and
the
mixed-use
zone.
N
So
that
kind
of
became
the
area
of
focus
in
terms
of
geography
taking
the
neighborhood
centers
and
then
the
zoning
districts
within
them
I
mentioned
that
a
big
part
of
this
is
implementing
the
the
comprehensive
plan.
There
are
two
primary
policies
that
we're
looking
to
implement
through
these
changes
and
the
first
is
this
policy
2.19
related
to
Neighborhood
centers.
So
you
might
remember,
I
had
a
very
similar
slide
for
module
two,
because
we
have
similar
policies
for
the
light
industrial
areas
that
we
were
intending
to
implement
through
that
ordinance.
N
So
this
talks
about
how
the
city
should
encourage
neighborhood
centers
to
provide
pedestrian
friendly
and
welcoming
environments
with
a
mix
of
land
uses
and
then
give
several
guiding
principles
that
neighborhood
centers
should
meet
the
everyday
needs
of
neighboring
communities
really
getting
to
that
15-minute
neighborhood
idea
and
then
also
in
terms
of
residential
neighborhood
centers
should
ensure
appropriate
scale
transitions
to
neighboring
residential
uses.
N
So
the
idea
with
that
is
that
kind
of
the
the
bulk
of
intensity
should
be
near
the
center
of
the
neighborhood
center,
and
then
it
would
kind
of
Ratchet
down
in
intensity
so
using
different
types
of
low
and
medium
density,
residential
uses
to
kind
of
transition
transition
intensities
from
the
more
intensive
part
of
the
neighborhood
center
to
maybe
the
single
family,
residential
neighborhoods
that
surround
it.
So
those
are
really
important
policies
that
we're
intending
to
implement
and
then
another
one
is
2.24.
N
This
is
the
commitment
to
a
walkable
and
accessible
City,
so
this
policy
talks
about
trying
to
develop
a
walkable
and
accessible
City
by
making
sure
that
neighborhoods
and
mixed-use
business
areas
can
provide
easy
and
safe
access
by
foot
bike
in
transit
to
places
like
neighborhood
centers,
Community
facilities,
Transit
stations,
public
spaces.
Really
this
is
the
15-minute
neighborhood
idea,
so
in
taking
that
neighborhood
center
policy
and
the
this
walkable
and
accessible
City
policy.
N
That's
where
we've
come
to
the
the
walkable
neighborhoods
scope
for
this
project
mentioned
that
the
scope
for
the
project
and
the
changes
that
we're
contemplating
were
really
informed
by
the
past
engagement
that
we've
done
on
this
project
as
well.
So
we've
heard
a
lot:
we've
touched
on
The
Talk
many
times
the
engagement
for
module,
one
two
phase,
one
all
the
different
projects
we've
been
doing
related
to
this,
but
I
just
wanted
to
to
highlight
some
of
that.
N
So
what
we
heard
before
this
year,
when
we
kicked
off
module
three,
we
did
engagement
back
in
2019
pre-pandemic
in
person
where
we
were
able
to
talk
with
people
about
what
kind
of
uses
they
wanted
to
see
more
of
or
less
of,
and
then
we
had
virtual
engagement
during
the
pandemic,
which
also
specifically
talked
about
neighborhood
centers.
We've
got
great
input
and
Direction
there
and
then
just
as
an
overview,
quick
overview.
N
At
that
time,
people
said
they
wanted
to
see
more
mixed
uses,
more
neighborhood
stores,
walkable
places,
restaurants,
shops,
retail,
Green,
Space
things
like
that,
and
then
less
parking
traffic,
Banks
car
dealerships,
gas
stations,
fast
food
and
drive-throughs.
N
So
that
brings
us
to
today.
This
summer
we
have
been
focusing
on
community
engagement
over
the
last
several
months
and
I
did
want
to
provide
an
overview
of
all
of
the
input
that
we've
been
getting
to
you
all.
So
one
of
the
big
things
that
we
wanted
to
do
because
we
had
done
engagement
that
talked
kind
of
generally
about
these
changes
or
what
people
would
want
to
see
in
their
neighborhood.
N
N
So
these
are
the
and
I'll
go
through
these
changes
in
more
detail
as
we
get
to
the
questions
part,
but
just
to
give
you
an
idea
that
these
were
the
changes
that
we've
been
presenting
for
input
over
the
last
couple
of
months
this
summer.
So
for
our
community
engagement
over
the
summer,
we've
done
several
things.
We
developed
a
virtual
story
map,
which
is
an
interactive
website
map
that
people
can
explore.
I'll,
explain
that
more
on
the
next
slide,
as
well
as
well
as
a
short
questionnaire.
N
We've
been
promoting
it
on
social
media
through
email
and
on
a
press
release
and
sorry
gotta
drink
some
water
I'm.
Talking
too
fast,
and
then
we've
also
been
supplementing
this
virtual
engagement
with
in-person
work.
So
it's
been
really
fun
that
the
last
couple
of
weeks
we've
been
doing
pop-ups
at
several
of
the
neighborhood
centers.
So
we
just
taken
a
big
board
and
stood
outside
of
several
neighborhood
centers
and
talked
to
people
as
they're
walking
in
so
we
were
at
Bay,
smart
and
Ideal
Market,
Meadows
and
Gun
Barrel.
N
We've
also
been
at
some
fairs,
and
events
like
older
social
streets
and
the
Ponderosa
block
party
that
was
last
weekend
and
we've
just
been
chatting
with
people
about
the
proposed
changes
and
what
they
might
want
to
see.
What
would
get
them
to
walk
to
their
Neighborhood
Center
more
and
we've
been
getting
some
great
input.
That
I
will
give
a
summary
of
as
we
get
through
further
through
the
presentation.
N
We
also
sent
mailings
to
all
the
neighborhood
center
business
and
Property
Owners,
so
that
they're,
aware
of
the
opportunity
to
provide
input
and
the
upcoming
changes
that
could
be
happening
to
the
neighborhood
centers
I
just
wanted
to
explain
the
story
map
in
questionnaire
a
bit
more.
It
could
because
it's
currently
open,
if
you
haven't
seen
it
yet,
it's
a
really
fun
page
where
you
can
explore
a
guided
map
which
gives
information
on
each
one
of
the
neighborhood
centers.
It
talks
about
what
zoning
districts
are
in
there.
N
What
types
of
businesses
are
currently
there
the
number
of
businesses,
and
then
it
lists
the
potential
changes
in
each
Neighborhood
Center
for
people
to
understand
it's
going
to
be
open
until
the
end
of
July.
It's
been
open
since
July
10th
we've
had
nearly
190
responses,
which
is
great
for
a
zoning
zoning
survey,
but
the
questionnaire
asks
what
people's
current
access
to
Services
looks
like
like
what
kind
of
things
they
can
get
to
from
their
home
already
businesses
that
they
want
to
see
more
of
businesses.
N
They
have
concerns
about
or
if
they
have
any
concerns
with
the
proposed
changes.
So
we've
been
getting
great
responses
on
that
so
far
and
I
I
just
wanted
to
share
some
preliminary
themes.
Obviously,
the
questionnaire
has
not
closed
and
will
not
close
until
the
end
of
Monday,
but
we
are
seeing
some
common
themes
that
I
wanted
to
share
with
you,
and
then
this
is
both
from
the
actual
questionnaire
and
the
in-person
work
that
we've
been
doing
and
conversations
that
we've
been
having.
N
So
lots
of
support
for
seeing
more
restaurants,
grocery
stores,
especially
small
grocery
stores,
small
retail
shops
pharmacies,
have
come
up
a
lot
coffee
shops,
small
music
venues,
ice
cream,
I,
don't
know
if
we
would
get
the
ice
cream
one
if
we
were
doing
this
in
November,
but
doing
it
in
July
we're
getting
a
lot
of
comments
about
ice
cream,
bakeries,
post
offices
and
then
a
lot
of
comments
about
local
businesses
and
trying
to
do
whatever
we
can
to
help
local
businesses
thrive
in
Boulder.
N
N
In
addition
to
the
kind
of
general
public
engagement
that
we've
been
doing,
we
also
have
three
important
groups:
we've
been
meeting
with
and
I
will
go
through
more
of
their
specific
input
as
we
get
through
the
different
questions,
but
just
an
overview
of
these
groups.
So
we
have
a
public
working
group
that
we've
been
working
with
for
over
a
year
on
these
use
table
changes,
they're
a
group
of
stakeholders
and
interested
residents.
We
met
with
them
back
in
March
and
June
to
talk
about.
N
You
know
the
scope
of
module
three,
and
also
they
provided
a
lot
of
really
great
Direction
and
feedback
on
the
story,
map
and
questionnaire,
and
how
to
develop
the
questions
and
how
the
story
map
would
work,
and
things
like
that.
So
that's
been
great.
We
also
meet
with
two
members
of
the
planning
board
act
as
our
Liaisons
for
this
project,
so
we've
been
meeting
with
them
over
the
last
year
and
a
half
I
think
to
talk
about
it.
We
met
with
them
in
March
and
June.
N
So,
like
I,
said
kind
of
the
plan
that
I
had
for
this
is
to
go
through
each
one
of
the
questions.
We
have
four
questions
that
were
in
the
memo
and
I'll
provide
just
a
one
slide
overview.
N
A
background
on
the
topic
and
then
I
have
a
summary
of
the
input
that
we've
gotten
so
far
on
that
topic
and
then
a
space
for
us
to
to
talk
about
the
question
for
you
all.
So
the
first
one
up
is
restaurants,
so
restaurants
is
kind
of
has
become
kind
of
a
main
topic
of
this.
This
part
of
the
project.
It's
something
that
obviously
we've
heard
throughout
engagement
over
the
many
years
that
people
want
to
see
more
restaurants.
N
And
when
we
look
at
the
code,
it's
currently
a
very
complex
Patchwork
of
regulations.
We
made
some
big
improvements
with
module
one
to
the
organization
of
the
restaurants,
but
we
didn't
make
substantive
changes
during
module
one.
So
those
complex
regulations
are
still
bare
they're,
just
organized
better
now,
so
we
have
12.
That's
essentially
12
different
versions
of
restaurant
regulations
for
different
zoning
districts
around
the
city
and
the
standards
are
mostly
about
what
the
overall
size
of
the
restaurant
can
be.
N
The
size
of
the
patio
can
be
and
what
hours
they
can
operate,
but
it's
all
in
you
know
12
different
versions
of
that,
and
some
of
them
are
only
you
know.
A
couple
hundred
square
feet
different
than
a
different
zoning
District,
so
there's
small
differences
between
those
throughout
the
city.
N
So
what
we
see
when
we
look
at
those
those
regulations
is
that
there
are
a
lot
of
opportunities
to
simplify
the
regulations
and
to
streamline
the
approval
process
for
restaurants,
which
would
make
it
easier
for
restaurants
to
open
in
Boulder,
and
we
could
do
that
in
a
number
of
ways.
So
first
is
allowing
a
larger
allowable
overall
size
by
rate,
so
right
now
in
many
of
our
districts
in
Boulder
to
be
allowed
by
right,
which
means
that
you
don't
have
to
go
through
a
special
process
like
a
use
review.
N
The
restaurant
has
to
be
at
least
or
under
a
thousand
square
feet
or
1500
square
feet.
So
just
for
perspective,
if
you've
been
to
zo
mama,
that's
1700
square
feet
so
that
actually
captures
most.
That's
a
really
small
restaurant
to
be
able
to
have
to
go
to
be
approved
by
right.
So
what
it
means
is
that
almost
every
restaurant
ends
up
having
to
get
a
use
review
to
be
approved.
N
Similarly,
we
have
restrictions
on
patio
sizes
and
it's
often
about
300
square
feet.
So
if
any
restaurant
wants
to
have
a
patio,
that's
larger
than
300
square
feet
in
most
districts
in
the
city,
that's
kicked
into
a
use
review.
N
So
obviously,
since
covid
attitudes,
especially
since
covet
attitudes
about
outdoor
seating,
have
changed
significantly
and
many
people
are
more
interested
in
outdoor
seating,
so
that
was
also
an
opportunity
area.
We
saw
to
change
that
could
streamline
the
approval
process
by
allowing
more
restaurants
to
be
approved
by
right
by
removing
that
as
a
a
limitation
that
kicks
you
into
use
review,
but
instead
trying
to
replace
that
with
just
more
General
outdoor
seating
standards
for
patios
that
are
near
to
nearby
residential
areas.
N
So
I
think
the
intent
of
the
regulation
is
to
mitigate
any
impacts
against
nearby
residential
uses,
but
we
could
do
that.
We
could
essentially
end
up
at
the
same
conclusion,
by
having
these
more
General
standards
without
having
to
have
a
special
process
for
it
and
then
related
to
the
hours
of
operation.
One
thing:
that's
kind
of
interesting
thing
about
Boulder
is
that
we
regulate
restaurants
and
bars,
essentially
that
they're
the
same
line
in
the
youth
table,
so
they
have
the
same
regulations
and
in
looking
through
that
and
looking
at
some
other
cities
it.
N
Actually
we
do
think
the
hours
of
operation
is
helpful
to
have
as
a
distinguishing
factor
between
a
restaurant
and
a
bar.
So
if
you
are
open
late,
you're
more
likely
to
be
a
bar
which
potentially
will
have
more
impact
on
neighbors,
so
maintaining
that
hours
of
operation
is
something
that
we're
not
proposing
to
change
in
the
districts
that
are
close
to
residential
areas.
N
Finally,
for
you
know,
if
we
increase
the
larger
allowable
size
by
right,
there
would
always
be
a
use
review
option
if
there's
a
larger
restaurant
or
if
there's
still
hours
of
operation
limits,
there
could
be
a
use
review
option
for
people
to
open
later,
so
we'd
still
maintain
that
option
of
flexibility
as
well,
but
just
trying
it's
essentially
trying
to
get
more
restaurants
to
have
an
Avenue
where
they
can
approve
be
approved
by
right
rather
than
capturing
so
many
of
them
and
putting
them
through
user
abuse.
N
What
we've
heard
on
the
restaurant
topic
so
far
generally
tons
of
support,
so
the
the
one
on
the
left
is
both
the
questionnaire
and
also
the
in-person
engagement
that
we've
been
doing
over
the
summer.
Lots
of
support
for
restaurants
in
neighborhood
centers
lots
of
support
for
making
the
city
process
easier
for
restaurants
to
open
people
were
pretty
surprised
to
hear
that
it's
often
challenging
for
restaurants
to
get
through
the
city
process
and
then
a
lot
of
support
for
wanting
to
see
more
outdoor
seating,
which
I
already
mentioned
from
our
public
working
group.
N
Our
planning
board
Liaisons
and
our
community
connectors
also
heard
lots
of
support.
Some
of
the
things
that
were
brought
up
by
the
public
working
group
was
the
hill
actually
has
unique
restaurant
standards
and
so
just
making
sure
that
those
remain
they're,
something
that
were
adopted
relatively
recently
and
there's
a
lot
of
work
being
done
on
the
hill
right
now.
So
maybe
that
would
be
a
future
project
once
there's
more
policy
direction
for
the
hill
and
then
from
the
community
connectors.
N
There
was
lots
of
support
for
allowing
more
restaurants
and
just
allowing
local
businesses
and
Entrepreneurship
throughout
the
city
and
then
also
just
wanting
more
more
smaller
and
more
ethnically
diverse
restaurants
throughout
the
city.
So
that's
kind
of
the
summary
of
the
restaurant
topic.
The
question
that
I
put
into
the
memo
is:
does
city
council
have
any
comments
related
to
potential
changes
that
would
streamline
the
restaurant
approval
process
and
I'll
stop
sharing
while
we're
chatting.
B
B
G
Multi-Use
for
institution
and
government
buildings
and
do
let
me
know
if
this
question
is
for
the
next
presentation.
I
think
it
relates
to
this
present
presentation
and
how
does
that
help
our
goal
of
removing
barriers
for
neighborhood
centers
in
15
minutes
neighborhoods,
so
I
just
did
not
understand
how
multi-use
for
institution
and
government
buildings
how
that
correlate
or
interrelate
with
or
values
of,
removing
barriers.
G
N
Yeah,
that's
a
good
question
and
I'll
get
more
into
detail
of
those.
Those
changes
from
that
colorful
slide
on
the
the
fourth
section,
but
just
to
highlight
one
thing
that
we
heard
and
I
was
surprised
to
hear
it
so
often,
but
we
heard
from
a
lot
of
people
throughout
the
engagement
was
that
people
wanted
to
see
more
post
offices
throughout
the
city.
So
a
post
office
would
actually
be
classified
as
a
governmental
facility
and
we
saw
that
those
are
actually
prohibited
in
the
mixed
juice
zoning
districts.
N
So
that's
an
opportunity
area
where
we
saw
we
could
allow
those
governmental
facilities
which
would
allow
post
offices
now.
Obviously,
zoning
doesn't
control
everything
and
the
U.S
Postal
Service
probably
makes
their
own
decisions
about
where
they
want
to
help
post
offices.
But
at
least
we
could
eliminate
that
barrier.
That's
in
the
land
use
code.
So
that's
where
that
one
came
from.
G
Thank
you
for
that,
and
I
once
had
a
request
from
a
Community
member
who
asked
me
Judy,
we
need
more
post
offices
and
I
was
like
that's
a
federal
yeah
as
opposed
to
the
city
council
one.
But
my
next
question
to
you:
I
was
trying
to
understand
the
use
review
on
issue.
G
Would
the
city
lose
money
if
we
had
I
mean
I
know
we're
talking
about
you
know
for
me
to
here
and
making
it
easier
for
businesses
to
operate
in
Boulder,
but
I'm
still
thinking
when
it
comes
to
our
taxes
and
CD
revenues?
Would
the
city
lose
money
if
we
had
uniform
rules
or
general
standards,
because
you
mentioned
overall
size
by
right?
Are
you
saying
that
if
you're
a
smaller
size,
there
would
be
no
use
review,
so
ultimately
they
would
not
have
to
come
before
the
city
to
get
any
type
of
special
approvals.
N
Yeah,
that's
a
great
question.
I
might
bounce
it
to
Brad
to
talk
more
about
the
fiscal
side
of
things,
but
one
thing
that
getting
if,
if
more
restaurants
can
be
approved
by
right,
you're
correct
they
wouldn't
have
to
go
through
a
discretionary
review
process
which
saves
staff
time
and
also
the.
O
I
think
you
said
that,
well,
you
know
our
goal
is
never
to
make
money
right
through
the
review
process,
we're
just
recovering
our
cost
for
providing
the
service,
but
we
all
collectively
have
a
goal
of
simplifying
process
for
applicants,
while
still
maintaining
the
appropriate
level
of
sturdy
guard
rails
and
accountability,
and
that's.
This
is
certainly
consistent
with
the
conversation
conversations
we've
had
with
Council
this
this
year
in
that
regard,
but
it
also
doesn't
mean
that
there
may
not
be
any
regulation.
O
G
K
Thanks
Tara
first
I,
thank
you
for
diving,
so
deep
into
the
plight
of
our
restaurants
and
hospitalities
businesses
in
Boulder.
We
all.
We
all
know
why
they're
they're,
struggling
and
one
of
the
biggest
reasons
is,
is
the
hurdles
to
do
business
in
our
community
so
I?
Thank
you
so
much
for
for
really
diving
and
tackling
into
this
and
and
it
to
be
clear,
I
mean
we
have
restaurants,
some
great
restaurateurs
in
Denver.
K
That
would
like
to
do
business
in
Boulder
and
won't
touch
us
with
a
10-foot
pole
because
of
our
processes
and
and
the
obstacles
it
is
and,
and
it's
hard
to
to
hear
happen
so
I'm
glad
that
we're
tackling
this
so
that
we
can
hopefully
continue
to
free
that
up
their
margins
are
just
so
narrow
right
that
that
sitting
in
review
for
an
extended
period
of
time,
largely
crushes
their
financial
options
to
make
that
happen.
K
So
with
that
said,
one
of
the
things
that
I
think
you
sort
of
touched
on
that
I
think
is:
should
I
I'd
like
to
go
Whole
Hog
in
for
for
the
metaphor,
there
is
just
eliminating
use
for
review
for
restaurants
in
downtown
in
downtown
zones.
I
mean
there's
just
largely
no
reason
for
us
to
really
do
that,
especially
when
they're
occupying
what
was
previously
a
restaurant
I
mean
it's,
it's
just
it's
frankly,
it's
infuriating
to
see
that
a
restaurant
has
to
redefine
its
purpose.
K
When
the
previous
purpose
was
the
same
thing,
it
should
be
a
check
box.
Are
you
doing
what
the
previous
face
did?
Yes,
all
right
now,
move
on
I
mean
it
should
be
as
streamlined
as
that.
So
I
I
think
we
can
need
to
go
further
down
that
path
of
making
it
as
easy
as
possible
for
restaurants
to
do
that
and
and
I
think
that
would
be
great,
so
I
don't
want
to
set
up
any
other
conditions
or
any
of
that,
because
then
we
have
to
manage
that
I.
K
Just
if
it's
downtown
districts-
just
let
it
be,
let
it
be
by
right,
I,
I
and
and
if
it
swings
the
other
way,
then
we
can
put
some
guardrails
on,
but
we've
been
playing
way
too
tight
for
too
long
for
them.
So
that
would
be
the
thing
I'd
recommend
the
most
with
the
restaurants,
and
hopefully
we
can.
We
can
get
that
going,
but
thanks
again
for
for
diving
deep
into
that
and
I
look
forward
to
seeing
where
we
go
from
there.
J
Right
well,
I
just
want
to
give
two
thumbs
up
to
all
this.
The
direction
you're
going
in
and
I
give
three
thumbs
up.
If
I
had
three
hands,
I'm
excited
to
see
the
streamlining
of
the
restaurant
review
process.
I
sat
through
my
share
of
use,
reviews
on
planning
board,
and
so
many
of
them
just
made
total
sense.
So
you'd
have
a
hearing
and
you'd
say
yes
and
then
you're
like.
J
Why
did
we
spend
all
that
time
on
that,
and
so
I
would
just
Echo
what
Matt
said
I
would
if
anything,
I'd
just
encourage
you
to
maybe
look
at
some
potential
additional
opportunities
to
remove
the
use
review
process
and
the
DT
zones
seem
like
the
most
obvious
ones,
but
I
know
maybe
BMS
as
well.
Those
are
designed
to
be
business
districts
that
seems
like
restaurants,
just
kind
of
belong
in
them,
so
I'd
encourage
a
little
extra
look
at
the
zones
that
those
might
be
allowed
in
and
then
I
wanted
to
pick
up
on.
J
One
comment
that
came
from
the
community
connectors,
which
was
about
more
flexibility
around
food
trucks,
and
that
may
be
totally
out
of
scope
for
this,
but
I've
always
felt
like
our
rules
on
food
trucks
are
too
restricted,
and
it's
also
how
many
of
our
immigrant
populations
like
we'll
get.
You
know
foods
from
like
a
local
food
truck.
That's
operating
illegally
I
see
that
in
my
neighbor
it
always
makes
me
happy
when
a
taco
truck
spring
Springs
up
on
a
corner,
even
though
I
know
they're
not
allowed
to
be
there.
J
I
You
and
I
sort
of
have
a
tie-in
question.
This
is
around
the
connectors
feedback.
So
when
I
sort
of
look
at
their
feedback
as
a
whole,
it
seems
like
what
they're
getting
at
is
wanting
more
just
opportunities
for
people
starting
out
and
I'm.
Just
wondering.
Is
there
anything
about
adjusting
the
use
by
right
so
that
you
can
have
a
larger
square
footage?
I
Are
we
going
to
incentivize
that
type
of
restaurant
at
the
and
and
sort
of
make
it
harder
for
folks
who
might
want
to
maybe
all
the
resources
they
have
are
to
start
a
smaller
space?
So
I'm
just
wondering
about
that?
Yeah.
N
I
think
that's
that's
the
big
intent
in
increasing
the
allowable
size,
so
that
would
probably
you
know
if
we
increase
right
now,
it's
mostly
a
thousand
or
500
square
feet
in
most
zoning
districts.
If
we
increase
that
to
something
like
4
000
square
feet
that
would
capture
a
lot
of
those
small
businesses
that
would
capture
many
of
the
restaurants
that
we
have.
But
there
might,
there
would
be
a
disincentive
for
larger
restaurants,
which
more
typically
are
like
chains
and
things
like
that,
because
they
would
have
to
go
through
the
use
review
process.
N
So
I
think
in
that
way,
I'm
not
sure
if
I'm
answering
your
question,
but
it's
intending
to
incentivize
the
smaller
local
businesses,
which
is
what
we're
hearing.
While
you
know
having
maybe
a
closer
look
at
those
larger
restaurants.
I
Are
we
collecting
any
kind
of
demographic
information,
because
you
know
I
know
it's
exciting
that
we
have
more
people
than
you
all,
typically
get,
and
still
just
a
fraction
of
a
percentage
of
the
people
in
the
community,
and
probably
even
that
you
know,
live
in
an
area
and
so
do
we
have
any
way
of
sort
of
seeing
you
know
who
who
are
we
missing
and
those
kinds
of
community
engagements
that
we
can
then
use
to
inform?
How
we're
doing
some
other
engagements.
N
N
Let's
see
it
asks
like
income
level
race,
and
then
we
also
in
the
questionnaire
asked
where
to
there's
like
a
little
mapping
feature
where
they
can
put
a
pin
on
where
they
live.
So
we
can
also
see
the
geographic
distribution
of
people,
so
that
gives
us
a
good
idea
of
how
we
can
adjust
and
Target.
N
It's
not
perfect,
because
not
everyone
answers
it
and
then
in
person.
Obviously
we're
not
collecting
demographic
information
while
we're
in
person,
but
we
are,
we
did
try
to
locate
those
pop-ups
in
like
all
and
try
to
get
as
geographically
diverse
as
we
could
around
the
city
and
also
talk.
You
know
we
were
there
for
a
while
to
try
to
talk
to
as
many
people
as
possible.
B
Thanks
so
much
Nicole
Lauren
you're
next.
L
Thanks,
my
first
question
is
sort
of
more
broad
about
this
project.
I
noticed
the
a
lot
of
the
sort
of
initial
idea
for
why
we
would
go
into
this
is
about
walkability
in
15-minute.
Neighborhoods
are
these
zones
that
we're
looking
at
in
this
third
portion
like
covering
15-minute
walkability
for
the
most
of
our
city?
Do
we
know
what
percentage
of
the
city
is
within
15
minutes
of
these
areas?.
N
Yeah,
our
my
colleagues
in
our
transportation
department
have
done
really
great
work
on
the
walkability
there's
the
safe
I'm,
forgetting
the
name
of
the
plan,
but
they've
done
the
there's
a
great
plan,
that's
related
to
the
walkable
neighborhoods
concept
and
there's
kind
of
a
walk
shed
map.
So
we
did
do
some
initial
analysis
using
that
map.
N
It's
in
the
data
that
they
used
is
imperfect,
I
would
say
so
we
decided
not
to
link
it
exactly
to
this,
but
it
definitely
informed
making
sure
you
know
we
kind
of
looked
at
it
and
generally,
if
you
look
at
that
map,
the
Eastern
side
of
the
city
has
lower
levels
of
walkability
and
that's
where
a
lot
of
these
shopping
I
mean
a
lot
of
the
neighborhood.
Centers
are
shopping,
centers,
which
have
large
parking
lots
and
things
like
that.
So,
but
they
do,
they
still
serve
all
the
neighborhoods
around
them.
N
So
it's
interesting
to
look
at
together.
Obviously
this
the
walkability
concept
is
both
a
land
use
and
a
transportation
issue,
so
we're
trying
to
tackle
the
land
use
side
and
then
there's
a
lot
of
great
work
being
done
on
the
transportation
side
as
well.
L
Okay,
thank
you
related
to
this
particular
section.
It
was
interesting
to
hear
that
you
heard
that
people
on
the
hill
were
interested
in
keeping
the
rules
the
same
for
the
moment,
I
had
heard
sort
of
some
comments
that
were
the
opposite
of
that
that
were
wanting
sort
of
the
rules
around
restaurants
on
the
hill
to
be
brought
in
line
closer
with,
what's
happening
in
the
city.
Did
you
all?
Did
you
hear
both
things
or
yeah.
N
N
This
was
one
member
of
our
working
group
who's
part
of
the
neighborhood
association
who
just
wanted
had
worked
on
those
initial
changes
which
are
not
I,
can't
remember
exactly
what
year
they
were
adopted,
but
they're,
not
very
old,
and
so
it
felt
like
with
the
hill,
and
this
is
something
I'm
happy
to
hear
your
direction
on
tonight,
but
because
those
were
recent
regulations-
and
there
are
kind
of
upcoming
conversations
about
the
hill-
that
maybe
that's
something
that's
further
down
the
line
to
look
at
but
I'm
happy
to
yeah,
receive
Direction
and
make
changes
there
as
well.
N
L
You
I
appreciate
the
Deep
dive
you
guys
have
taken
into
this.
I
generally
am
going
to
be
on
the
side
of
streamlining
and
efficiency
and
making
are
very
complicated,
not
of
codes
that
we've
created
a
little
bit
less
complicated,
so
I
would
be
interested
in
having
the
hills
sort
of
rolled
into
this
as
well.
L
I
just
want
to
encourage
you
guys
to
actually
make
what
will
be
a
fairly
substantial
change
in
those,
because
that's
what
it
will
take.
L
Nicole
brought
up
an
interesting
point
and
I
would
be
and
given
I
think
the
amount
of
community
interest
in
local
businesses.
I
wonder
if
there's
maybe
and
I
know
this
is
a
complicated
throwing
a
nail
into
something
but
a
use
review
for
chain
restaurants,
or
something
like
that,
because
I
do
think
that
it
is.
You
know
people
are
most
interested
in
having
sort
of
those
local
businesses
in
the
neighborhoods
and
things
like
that.
So
maybe
particularly
it's
a
neighborhood
level.
L
I
would
be
interested
in
thinking
about
something
like
that.
I
understand
that
it
might
be
overly
complicated
to
actually
implement,
but
would
love
to
hear
what
you
guys
come
back
with
on
that.
N
H
Council
member
friend
I've
not
had
the
opportunity
to
look
into
that,
but
our
office
is
very
happy
to
investigate
that
and
get
back
to
you.
B
Also
colloquine,
so
I,
Laura
and
I
understand
the
spirit
of
it.
But
I'm
wondering
does
a
chain
mean
that
you
have
one
restaurant
in
Denver
and
now
you're
opening
up
one
in
Boulder
or
they're?
Already,
oh.
L
E
Thanks
I'm
not
getting
good
on
the
rabbit
hole
chains,
because
I
have
this
very
tough
one,
so
I'm
going
to
leave
that
alone,
but
I
did
want
to
do
I,
think,
Elisa
and
and
Brad
and
all
team
for
the
great
work
they've
done
on
restaurants.
I,
look
for
the
other
three
modules
here
in
a
second
I
just
want
to
do
a
plus
one
on
what
Lauren
and
Matt
and
Aaron
said
about
restaurants,
if
anything,
we're
not
going
far
enough.
B
B
I
want
to
add
to
you,
Matt's
comments
about
downtown
and
add
that
I
think
restaurants
are
important
in
our
neighborhood
centers
and
to
especially,
if
we're
trying
to
do
walkable
neighborhoods,
it
will
be
really
awesome
to
be
able
to
walk
to
the
restaurants.
I
think
that
making
it
easier
in
the
neighborhood
centers
will
be
great.
Next
I
want
to
agree
with
everybody
on
the
hill
I
feel.
Since
the
pandemic,
the
hill
has
taken
a
big
hit,
the
hill
commercial
area.
B
B
So
that's
what
I'm
hoping
happens
from
all
this
I,
don't
want
to
say
any
more
about
chains,
because
we
all
agree
that
it's
an
interesting
concept
and
also
we
have
to
see
what
you
all
think
about
it
and
I
agree
with
everybody
actually
what
they
said
in
terms
of
making
it
easier
for
restaurants.
So
that's
it!
That's
all.
I
have
I
guess
we
are
ready.
I,
don't
see
any
more
hands
to
go
on
to
the
next
portion.
N
All
right,
great
thanks
for
all
that
great
feedback
all
right,
so
our
next
topic
is
jumping
to
residential.
So
this
is
a
bit
narrower
of
a
topic,
so
this
is
duplexes
and
Townhomes.
In
our
BT
business.
Transitional
and
VR
business
Regional
zoning
districts
I've
tried
to
highlight
those
on
the
map,
so
you
can
see
where
those
are
in
the
city.
N
Right
now,
in
those
districts,
there
is
a
use
review
required
if
a
duplex
or
town
home
is
located
on
a
ground
floor
which
is
kind
of
a
funny
regulation,
especially
for
Town
Homes,
because
I'm
not
really
sure
how
you
have
a
town
home,
that's
not
on
a
ground
floor,
so
it
basically
means
that
you
have
to
have
a
use
review.
If
you
want
to
have
a
town
home,
we
have
a
similar
requirement
in
our
BC
zoning
District
as
well.
N
The
I
the
opportunity
that
we
saw
with
these
related
to
this
project
is
to
remove
the
barrier.
We've
heard
a
lot
about
middle
housing
and
also
looking
at
that
policy
that
talked
about
you
know,
transitioning
down.
We
thought
that
duplexes
and
Townhomes
would
be
a
really
nice
way
to
kind
of
have
that
scale
of
transition
from
the
the
business
zones
to
residential
areas,
so
removing
that
barrier
for
duplexes
and
Townhomes
and
just
allowing
them
by
right
in
the
BT
and
BR
zoning
districts.
N
N
So
we
were
thinking
that
the
BT
and
BR
would
be
the
the
districts
to
make
that
change,
and
that's.
This
is
a
change
that
we
presented
on
this
story
map
and
the
questionnaire
and
also
have
been
talking
to
people
out
and
about
this
summer.
We've
heard
lots
of
support
for
Middle
housing
in
the
neighborhood
centers
lots
of
people
that
we
talked
to
were
surprised
that
they
were
restricted
now
and
then
we
had
really
good
conversations
about
how
mixing
uses
having
more
housing
nearby
would
add
to
the
vibrancy
of
the
neighborhood
centers.
N
Similarly,
in
the
working
group
and
planning
board
Liaisons,
there
was
support
for
the
duplexes
and
Townhomes
in
the
neighborhood
centers.
Some
discussions
about
like
potential
area
plans
could
also
help
Revitalize
some
centers
and
then
the
community
connectors
also
expressed
some
support
for
the
duplexes
and
Townhomes.
So
that's
all
I
have
for
that
one.
The
question
is:
does
the
count
do?
Does
the
city
council
have
any
comments
related
to
allowing
duplexes
and
Townhomes
on
the
ground
floor
in
the
BT
and
VR
zoning
districts?
L
So
first
I
have
a
question,
particularly
with
the
BT
zones.
When
I
look
at
those
zones,
it
looks
like
there's
a
and
I.
Don't
know
the
Zone
very
well,
but
it
seems
like
there's
a
fair
number
of
apartment
buildings
and
things
in
that
zone.
N
The
the
BT
Zone
in
particular
is
intended
to
be
a
transitional
zone.
So
it's
not
a
it's.
Not
a
particularly
intense
Zone
I'd
have
to
look
and
see.
I,
don't
know
off
the
top
of
my
head
exactly
what
standards
apply
to
like
attached
dwelling
units,
the
apartment
buildings,
but
the
the
intent
is
to
focus
on
you
know,
having
like
retail
and
commercial
on
the
ground
floor
and
I.
N
Think
that's
where
the
the
requirement
to
not
have
duplexes
and
Townhomes
on
the
ground
floor
comes
from,
and
but
this
would
allow
the
the
kind
of
middle
housing
to
be
located
on
the
ground
floor,
where
let
me
just
double
check,
I'm,
pretty
sure
that
attached
rolling
units
also
cannot
be
on
the
ground
floor.
So
let
me
just
confirm.
L
N
L
I
was
also
wondering
if
you
had
thought
about
expanding
that
definition
to
live
work
units,
since
it
is
like
transitional
between
the
business
and
residential
zones.
That
seemed
like
I
noticed
that
those
were
also
conditional
uses
in
that
zone.
N
So
actually
we
made
some
changes
to
the
liver
units
as
part
of
modules
yeah
as
module
two,
so
we
expanded.
That
was
one
of
the
only
changes
that
was
outside
of
the
industrial
districts,
so
we
expanded
that,
and
so
there
aren't
limitations.
There's
just
the
general
limitations
that
apply
to
livework
units
anywhere
like
the
owner
has
to
live,
or
the
business
operator
has
to
live
there
and
things
like
that
which
we
talked
about
during
module
two,
but
there's
not
the
specific
ground
for
restriction
for
live
work
units.
N
L
I
guess
I'm
feeling
I
mean
I
love
the
idea
of
duplexes
and
triplexes
and
Townhomes
I'm.
Just
not
sure
that
these
are
the
zones
that
I'm
really
excited
about
seeing
those
in
I
guess
I'm
not
strongly
against
it,
but
this
just
particularly
when
I
start
to
think
about
like
the
29th
Street
mall,
and
you
know
the
downtown
area
of
Gun
Barrel.
Those
to
me
feel
like
areas
where
I'm
not
sure
that
I
agree
that
duplexes
and
triplexes
and
Townhomes
are
the
right
match
for
those
zones.
M
Thanks
thanks
Lisa
y'all
know:
I
have
not
met
a
duplex
or
townhome
I
didn't
like
so
I
generally
support
it,
but
what
I
don't
understand
is
what
does
it
mean
on
the
ground
floor
by
right,
like
if
I
think
of
duplexes
and
Townhomes
ordinarily,
they
have
a
second
level.
For
the
you
know,
a
town
home
goes
up
or
a
duplex
could
be
top
floor
bottom
floor.
Why?
Why
is
it
just
a
ground
floor?
What
am
I
missing.
N
So
the
intent
like
I
said
the
intent
of
the
districts
is
try
to
preserve
the
ground
floor
for
retailer
commercial
uses.
So
it's
a
it's
a
standard
that
we
actually
apply
to
lots
of
different
uses
throughout
the
code
you're
allowed.
But
if
you're,
if
you're
on
the
ground
floor,
you
need
a
use
review.
Basically,
if
you're
above
the
ground
floor,
you
don't
need
the
user
you
so
we've
applied
that
to
the
duplex
and
Townhomes
that's
kind
of
why
I
was
making
the
joke.
Is
that
Townhomes
really
can't
not
be
on
the
ground
floor?
N
So
it's
essentially
just
a
use,
review
duplexes.
You
could
technically
have
two
units
above
and
then
we
would
call
it
a
duplex,
but
that's
not
really
the
form
that
people
think
of
when
they
think
of
duplexes.
So
it's
a
little
bit
odd,
but
it's
a
standard.
That's
applied,
probably
to
30
different
uses
throughout
the
code.
M
I
Thank
you.
So
what
I'm
wondering
about
is
this?
You
know
if
we
have
duplexes
and
Townhomes
allowed
on
the
ground
floor
by
right.
I
N
No
yeah
and
I
think
that
was
the
as
we
were,
the
rationale
of
not
not
proposing
that
for
the
BC
zoning
districts
was
exactly
like
that,
like
that
is
intended
to
be
retail
on
the
ground
floor.
The
idea
with
the
BT
and
Dr
zones
is
that
they're
a
bit
more
transitional
zones
so
trying
to
get
at
that
comprehensive
plan
policy
that
talks
about
the
scaled
intensity.
N
So
that's
where
we
were
trying
to
you
know
like
transition
down
to
the
residential
areas
by
allowing
this
kind
of
middle
housing,
middle
density,
but
I
think
that
the
argument
could
definitely
be
made
that
that
would
take
space
from
some
of
those
other
uses.
We
did
hear
a
lot
of
support
for
the
duplexes
and
Townhomes
too,
though
so
yeah
interested
to
hear
the
direction
on
this
one
yeah.
I
Yeah
and
it's
with
it,
you
know
I
mean
one
one
of
the
other
things
that
I
wonder
about.
You
know
all
the
the
places
around
it
they
developed
with
a
certain
kind
of
capacity,
and
so,
if
we
are
then
incentivizing
away
from
some
of
the
denser
housing
with
these
duplexes-
and
you
know
Town
Homes,
what
does
that
then
do
to
the
other
retail
and
things
that
are
around
there
as
well,
so
anyway,
I
mean
I,
think
I
think
I'm.
I
You
know
in
a
place
where
I'm
a
little
nervous
and
and
I'm
wondering
about
if
this
is
a
place
where
we
can
maybe
wait
on
this
one
until
we
have
gone
through
some
of
the
process
of
looking
at
non-residential
uses
in
residential
areas
as
sort
of
a
I,
don't
know
put
it
on
the
shelf
for
a
little
bit
yeah
just
to
see
how
that
goes,
but
also
really
appreciate
the
idea
of
duplexes
and
town
homes.
I
K
Thanks
Tara
and
thanks
Lisa
for
for
taking
us
through
this
step
on
these
sort
of
duplexes
in
brt
and
BR
I'm
I'm,
not
yeah,
I'm,
feeling
a
little
conflicted
myself
on
this
and
I
think
I'm
actually
kind
of
coming
at
it
from
reverse.
K
Instead
of
thinking
about
these
denser
areas
and
working
out,
I'm
thinking
from
out
in
like
like
Rachel
I
I,
really
want
us
to
be
leveraging
more
duplexes
and
triplexes
and
stuff
to
sort
of
fill
that
Gap
in
our
scaffolding
of
housing
inventory
in
our
community,
which
is
essential
for
middle
and
upper
middle
income
to
even
have
access
to
our
community.
For
that
part,
but
it's
almost
pre
was
dependent
on
me
liking.
K
Well
then,
what's
that
intensity
transition
like
if
our
single
family
is
growing
in
intensity,
then
we're
capping
ourselves
by
making
the
compatibility
based
on
yesterday's
density,
not
tomorrow's
and
so
I
really
I
I'm
thinking
we
might
need
to
think
of
this
from
the
outside
in
and
the
inside
out
and
so
I
I
want
to
know
how
we
can
do
that.
So
that's
why
I'm
a
little
skeptical,
not
from
the
workflow,
but
just
do
we
end
up
locking
ourselves
in
to
this
work.
J
I
appreciate
the
questions
and
and
concerns
raised
by
my
colleagues
as
I
think
those
are
on
the
right
track
and
I'll
just
I'll
go
a
little
further
and
say
that
I
feel.
Like
you
know,
the
BR
zones
are
some
of
our
most
intense
zones
in
the
city.
J
Right,
that's
the
core
of
our
commercial
Center
in
the
29th
Street
area
and
also
in
Gun,
Barrel
and
so
BR
to
me
does
doesn't
feel
like
a
place
to
have
a
duplex
on
a
ground
floor
because
it
if
it's
a
place
to
have
more
intensity
and
more
commercial
opportunities,
so
it
I
would,
if
we're
going
to
move
this
forward,
I
would
definitely
confine
it
to
the
BT
this
Lisa,
you
made
some
great
points
about
transitioning
right
to
to
lower
intensity
neighborhoods
and
those
are
the
business
transitional
districts
right
so
that,
if
we're
going
to
move
forward,
I
would
I
would
look
at
those
rather
than
the
BRS
thanks.
B
Okay,
we
still
haven't
heard
from
a
few
people
that
I
don't
see
their
hands
up
yet,
but
meanwhile
I'm
gonna,
say
I'm
gonna,
disagree
with
everybody
and
say
I
would
like
to
see
town
homes
and
duplexes
in
these
areas.
First
of
all,
this
might
not
even
make
sense.
Tell
me
if
it
doesn't
Lisa,
but
we
have
an
awful
lot
of
first
floors
that
are
empty
right
now.
What
is
the
percentage
like
in
some
of
those
neighborhoods
are
pretty
high,
so
I
would
like
to
see
more
flexibility
in
terms
of
what
is
there
I?
B
Don't
know
that
we
need
to
have
I,
don't
know
we
have
enough
people
that
want
to
buy
stuff.
Let's
just
say
you
know:
we've
had
a
lot
of
changes
in
retail
lately
since
the
pandemic
and
with
online
purchasing
and
there's
nothing
to
me,
spook
gear,
slash,
not
fun
than
walking
through
an
empty
down
a
block
that
says
for
a
lease
on
like
every
other
location.
You
know
what
I'm
saying
so.
Does
that
even
apply
to
this
or
it
doesn't.
N
Those
yeah
I
mean
if
we,
if
you
could
open
up
to
more
uses,
whether
that's
residential
or
business,
then
that
might
take
the
place
of
empty
storefronts.
Typically,
if
the
building's
built
for
commercial
uses,
you
know
that
would
be
like
full
Redevelopment
to
to
transition
that
to
residential,
but
that
is
something
that
we
heard
some
concerns
up
throughout
to
during
the
it's
just
turnover
in
The,
Shopping,
Center's
business,
not
business,
not
being
sustainable
there.
Things
like
that.
So
that's
certainly
part
of
the
conversation
as
well.
Yeah.
B
B
So
for
that
reason,
and
of
course
Lauren
is
the
one
that
would
know
more
than
this
than
I
do
about
this,
but
I
can
visualize
if
I
guess
the
word
would
be
gentle.
If
gentle
infill
is
to
me
duplexes
and
Townhomes
and
I
like
that
idea
very
much.
So
that's
what
I
have
to
say
and
let's
move
on
to
Juni.
G
Yes,
I
just
wanted
to
add
quickly:
I,
don't
want
to
speak
for
Lauren
and
Rachel,
but
as
they
were
talking
I
was
listening.
I
was
like
I
think
it
makes
sense
and
I
think
my
Equity
lenses
or
tentacles,
just
as
they
were
talking
just
kind
of
came
out.
G
If
we
have
a
lot
of
apartments
in
certain
areas
and
we're
opening
up
those
areas
to
duplexes
as
we're
thinking
about
Equity,
the
idea
is:
are
we
creating
communities
that
are
not
mixed
income
right
because,
ultimately
not
to
say
that
some
people
don't
live
in
expensive
Apartments?
They
certainly
do
but
I
don't
live
in
an
expensive
apartment.
I
lived
in
an
area
where
it's
lower
income,
people
who
live
there
and
I'm
wondering
if
we
are
mostly
having
these
the
zoning
changes
in
areas
that
have
a
lot
of
apartments.
G
What
type
of
Community
are
we
creating?
So
that's
part
of
the
concern
for
me
as
Lauren
and
Nicole
was
talking
about
that.
So
considering
other
areas
as
well,
I
think
would
be
helpful
because
we
know
that
when
people
live
in
mixed
income
neighborhoods,
it's
almost
like
this
idea
of
what
is
it
the
the
tide
that
rides
all
boats?
G
I
I,
don't
always
know
that
saying
very
well,
but
the
idea
is
that
you
want
people
to
live
in
mixed
income
communities
so
that
they
can
rise
up
together
economically
instead
of
creating
areas
where
you
put
all
the
lower
income
people
in
the
same
area,
even
though
that's
not
the
intention,
but
that's
what
the
regulations
end
up
doing.
So
that's
my
piece.
Thank
you.
Thanks.
B
I
was
muted,
so
I
didn't
Judy
didn't
hear
me.
That
was
great
Junie
I
agree
with
that
Lauren
you're
next.
L
I
just
wanted
a
quick
follow-up
on
sort
of
something
you
brought
up
Tara
with
the
empty
storefronts
right
now,
residential
can
go
on
the
ground
floor
right
or
duplexes
or
town
homes.
It
just
would
require
a
use
review
exactly
so
it's
it's
less
about,
like
you
can
or
can't
do
it
and
more
about
like
what
pathway
is
easier.
Exactly.
O
Can
I
interject
real
quickly,
I
just
want
to
check
in
with
Lisa
and
make
sure
that
you
feel
like
feedback?
We
got
on
that
question
was
synthesized
enough
that
we
can
move
forward
with
with
something
or
bring
something
forward
that
matches
that
or
do
you
feel
like
you
need
something
a
little
more
definitive
in
terms
of
Direction
no.
N
I
feel
like
that
was
great
I
mean
there's
a
it's
exactly
the
reason
why
it's
one
of
the
key
questions
for
Council,
because
there's
you
know
pros
and
cons
to
either
side
so
I
think
hearing
from
all
of
you.
That
gives
me
a
lot
more
Direction
and
then
also
we'll
have
the
questionnaire
close
in
the
next
few
days.
So
we'll
have
that
that
public
input
on
that
as
well
so
I
think
I
have
enough
to
move
forward
with.
Thank.
N
All
right,
okay,
so
third
topic
or
Focus
area
there
we
go
is
related
to
vehicle
related
uses.
So
this
one
is
a
little
bit
different
than
the
other
changes,
so
everything
else
was
allowing
more
uses
or
making
it
easier
for
that
to
open.
This
is
kind
of
the
opposite.
So
in
looking
at
those
policies
related
to
safe
and
accessible
walkability
throughout
the
community.
One
thing
that
we
saw
in
the
planning
board
subcommittee
identified
as
something
to
support
walkability.
It
was
to
look
again
at
our
where
we're
allowing
vehicle-related
uses.
N
So
those
are
things
like
car
washes:
drive-throughs
gas
stations,
things
like
that
and
really
focusing
on
the
downtown
area,
which
is
our
Prime
walkable
area
in
Boulder.
Right
now,
those
type
of
uses
they
all
require
a
use
review,
but
we
actually
have
five
different
zoning
districts,
so
it
gets
complicated.
I
won't
get
two
in
the
weeds
for
you,
but
those
many
of
those
uses
are
allowed
but
require
a
use
review.
N
What
we've
heard
on
this
one
through
the
public
input
a
lot
of
similarities
throughout
the
different
groups.
So
so
we've
heard
a
lot
of
support
for
the
change,
with
the
caveat
that
as
long
as
they're
still
available
nearby
like
in
proximity-
maybe
they're
not
in
that
walkable
area,
but
they're
at
least
still
there
on
the
outskirts
or
on
the
periphery.
And
then
a
lot
of
people
were
surprised
that
they're
allowed
at
all.
N
Now,
because
there
there
aren't
very
many
of
these
uses
downtown
anyway,
so
that
was
kind
of
the
the
main
thing
we
heard.
We
also
got.
We've
had
some
interesting
discussions
about
the
value
of
gas
stations
and
the
convenience
stores
that
you
know
if,
if
you're
in
a
food
desert,
the
convenience
store
might
be
the
only
option
that
you
have
to
get
food,
and
so
there
are
some.
N
There
is
value
to
those
types
of
uses
as
well,
even
though
they're
vehicle
related
just
a
caveat
on
that,
is
that
we
do
allow
convenience
stores
without
gas
stations.
It's
just
typically.
N
You
see
them
well,
not
that
a
convenience
store
without
a
gas
station,
so
you
can
think
of
those
those
types,
but
so
some
interesting
conversations
about
this.
One
definitely
curious
to
hear
your
thoughts
on
this.
So
the
question
is:
do
you
have
any
comments
regarding
prohibiting
the
remaining
vehicle-related
uses
in
the
downtown
zoning
districts.
E
Thanks
I'm
gonna
start
with
a
question:
Lisa
I
think
the
answer
is
no,
but
is
there?
Is
there
anything
between
a
use
review,
which
is
what
these
uses
require
right
now
in
prohibiting
and
is
there
like
a
super
use,
review
or
a
use
review
with
certain
established
criteria
or
something
that
because
prohibited
seems
like
it
goes
a
really
really
long
ways,
especially
for
some
of
these
uses.
N
There
is
no
procedure
between
use,
review
and
prohibited.
We
do
have
the
conditional
use
process,
but
that's
in
between
allowed
and
use
review,
if
you
think
of
them
as
like
a
spectrum,
but
many
of
the
vehicle
related
uses
already
have
use
review
criteria
specific
to
them,
so
actually
I
think
all
of
them
do
maybe,
except
for
car,
washes
so
there's
like
the
drive-through
uses,
even
though
they're
allowed
in
downtown,
they
can't
be
anywhere
except
on
Canyon.
E
Yeah,
okay,
well,
I
guess!
My
reaction
is
some
of
those
things
like
car
washes,
I'm
fine
with,
because
there's
lots
of
car
washes
and
they're
on
the
periphery
and,
and
it
doesn't
matter
if
people
have
to
drive
a
few
blocks
to
wash
their
car
I
guess.
The
one
that
jumped
out
of
me
was
to
drive
throughs
and
I'd
have
to
really
walk
through
all
of
those
downtown
districts.
Take
a
look
at
them
property
by
property.
To
see
is.
Is
there
a
possibility
that
a
drive-thru
might
be
appropriate?
E
That's
why
I
think
the
purpose
of
the
use
review
is
is
to
say,
is
this
appropriate?
Does
it
meet
the
various
criteria
in
the
code
we've
we've
turned
down.
Use
reviews
before
we
just
turned
on
one
a
few
months
ago,
wasn't
even
downtown.
It
was
over
on
28th
street
because
it
the
plane,
board
and
I.
Think
majority
of
council
fell,
didn't
meet
the
criteria,
so
I
guess
I'd
be
a
little
reluctant
about
going
so
far
as
absolutely
prohibit.
Some
of
these
uses,
particularly
drive-throughs.
E
Some
of
the
others
like
car
washes,
I,
guess
I'm,
okay
with
but
I
I.
Think
that's,
maybe
a
step
too
far.
If
you
want
to
beef
up
the
criteria
and
have
more
criteria
than
there
is
right
now
are
right.
Now,
then,
that's
fine
I
have
to
take
a
look
at
those,
but
just
an
absolute
prohibition
seems
like
a
pretty
a
pretty
heavy
Sledgehammer
to
hit
on
a
problem
that
I'm,
not
sure
I
can't
even
remember
the
last
time
we
had
a
use
review
for
a
drive
through
downtown.
Have
we
had
one
last
several
years.
E
That
I'm,
aware
of
either
Aaron
might
remember
one
recently
but
I
I,
just
can't
think
of
one
last
one
I
can
think
of
was
the
one
over
on
28th
Street,
and
that
was
about
a
year
ago.
So
maybe
not
not
trying
to
fix
a
problem
that
doesn't
exist
thanks.
B
Thank
you
thanks
Bob
next
we
have
Lauren.
L
Thanks
yeah
I
was
wondering
how
many
of
these
exist
in
that
current
in
the
current
zones
that
we're
talking
about
and
how
many
proposals
we've
seen
coming
through.
For
these,
it
sounds
like
we
haven't
seen
any
proposals
recently,
so
I
guess
how
many
of
those
currently
exist.
N
So,
in
turn
the
gas
stations
we
have
the
one
on
Canyon,
so
there's
only
one
drive
through
there
I've
been
trying
to
track
it
down
the
exact
number.
There's
a
drive,
there's
technically
a
drive
through
the
on
Broadway
there's
a
drive
through
ATM
Bank
of
America
and
I
need
I
need
to
confirm
with
our
zoning
administrator
whether
we
would
call
that
a
drive-through
or
an
ATM.
N
There
are
not
that
I'm,
aware
of
and
like
I
mentioned,
there's
been
a
use
review
criteria
for
probably
decades
that
they
can't
be
allowed
anywhere,
except
on
Canyon.
So
I,
don't
think.
There's
any
other
drive-throughs
on
Canyon.
That
I
can
think
of.
There
are
no
car
washes.
The
bus
wash
is
the
closest
one,
but
that's
not
in
the
downtown
zoning
districts
and
then
fuel
service
stations.
There
aren't
any
of
those
that
I'm
aware
of
either.
L
So
I
guess
because
I
like
Simplicity,
it
feels
like
this
isn't
really
a
problem
that
we
need
to
solve,
because
we
don't
currently
have
those
things
and
they're
not
looking
to
go
there
and
and
I
do
I
mean
this
probably
would
be
treated
differently,
but
the
with
the
use
tables
but
I.
Think
about.
Like
you
know,
a
lot
of
those
businesses
have
parking
like
municipal
building
parking
underneath
and
what?
If
at
some
point,
we
want
to
change.
L
You
know
electrical
charging
stations,
you
know,
would
that
be
captured
as
an
auto
use
and
if
that's
the
case,
I'm
not
sure
that
I
want
to
prohibit
that,
because
that
might
make
sense
it
might
not.
But
I
I,
just
don't
feel
comfortable
at
this
point
saying
that
that
is
definitely
a
path.
I
would
want
to
go
down.
Okay,.
K
Thanks
Tara
Lauren
and
Bob
Bob
as
well,
but
Lauren
hit
that
last
point
about
Evie
I
was
going
to
clearly
ask
if
that
was
going
to
count,
because
I
could
imagine
certainly
from
our
our
climate
team.
K
We
know
that
charging
by
day
is
way
better
for
the
environment
than
charging
by
night,
and
so
you'd
want
to
maybe
have
charging
stations
that
are
more
than
just
a
single
one
around
town
and
is
that
a
vehicle
related
thing
that
is
then
thus
prohibited
so
I
I
would
see
that
these
would
then
be
in
conflict
with
our
other
larger
goals.
So
I
I
tend
to
agree
about
that.
I'm,
not
sure
I
see
the
problem
from
which
to
spend
all
this
time
trying
to
fix
something.
K
That's
not
quite
there,
so
so
I
would
agree
with
Lauren
and
Bob
on
this
one
and
then
the
drive-through
thing
like
in
particular,
I'm
thinking
of
accessibility
of
people
who
have
mobility
issues
and
needing
to
maybe
get
medicine
at
a
Walgreens,
and
they
need
that
drive
through.
For
that
think
about
being
sick
in
certain
things,
I
mean
I
did
there's
just
I,
don't
know,
there's
a
lot
of
things
that
I
could
see
those
uses
being
necessary
to
maintain
if
it
should
be
available
and
it's
the
right
spot.
M
Hi
Tara,
okay,
I
wrote
down
sort
of
a
stream
of
Consciousness
thoughts
here
so
kind
of
what
Matt
was
getting
out
with
drive-throughs
and
Equity.
I
do
think
that
there
could
be
scenarios
where
we
would
want
drive-throughs
downtown
and
we
don't
really
know.
What's
going
to
come
down
the
pike
I.
Think
of
you
know
when
I'm
sick
and
go
to
a
pharmacy.
I
will
often
look
through
look
for
a
drive-through.
You
know,
Walgreens
has
one
at
28th
like
I.
M
Don't
want
to
encourage
people
to
drive
farther
to
get
what
they
need
if
they're
looking
for
a
drive-through,
so
that
that
would
be
a
backwards
thing
for
us
to
be
doing
to
disincentivize
driving
and
that
just
causes
people
to
drive
to
you
know
the
outskirts
of
Boulder
or
Lewisville
to
get
what
they
need
at
a
drive
through.
I
also
think
that
with
covid
we
had
a
lot
of
sort
of
pop-up
drive-through
things
like
immunizations
and
covet
testing
and
I
would
I
would
not
want
to
limit
that
I.
M
Think
of
ATMs,
as
well
as
something
that
maybe
could
get
caught
up
in
that
and
also
I,
think
there's
a
bit
of
a
socioeconomic
component
here,
where
drive-throughs
for
food,
tendus
or
less
expensive
food
and
I
would
not
want
to
make
that
difficult
for
people
and
again
incentivize
them
to
drive
further
away
from
home.
Also,
if
you
have
really
small
children,
sometimes
like
if
you've
got
an
infant,
sometimes
like
that,
is
your
your
I.
M
Don't
know
rainbow
like
that:
you're
shooting
for
somewhere
that
you
can
get
coffee
without
having
to
get
an
infant
out
of
the
car.
So
that
is
also
something
that
we
might
be
forcing
people
to
drive
farther
I'm,
not
a
a
fan
of
being
in
the
car
at
all
or
driving
far,
but
I
just
think
that
these
things
would
be
a
little
bit
more
complicated
than
they
might
look
at
for
site
and
and
similarly
with
the
convenience
stores.
I.
M
Imagine
that
they
usually
go
with
gas
stations
for
some
Financial
relationship
like
the
gas
station,
probably
produces
more
of
the
money
than
the
convenience
store
and
I
think
those
are
a
place
where
some
people
are
going
to
feel
more
comfortable
shopping.
M
Even
if
there
is
like
a
Whole
Foods
nearby
like
there,
there
is
and
I
think
that
that
sometimes
Falls
along
socioeconomic
equity
line,
so
just
be
really
leery
of
us
putting
something
in
place
that
would
be
prohibitive
if
Without
Really,
knowing
that
that
serves
our
community
entirely
so
and
again,
I'd
be
very
concerned
about
having
the
reversing
of
causing
more
miles
driven
by
making
it
harder
to
get
these
things
that
people
are
going
to
want
regardless,
but
I
appreciate
the
effort.
I
love,
I,
love
the
way,
you're
thinking.
M
B
All
there's
never
a
24-hour
pharmacies
somewhere
that
I'm
going
to
ask
you
guys
later,
meanwhile,
I
need
to
know
these
have
been
great
comments.
Let's
continue
on
with
Aaron.
J
Yeah
well,
I'll
go
in
a
little
bit
of
a
different
direction
from
from
my
colleagues
here,
just
that,
like
Rachel
and
Matt,
you
made
great
points
about
the
need
for
drive-ins
for
certain
people
in
certain
uses
and
which
is
why
I
would
not
try
to
out
loud
them
in
in
the
city,
but
we're
just
talking
about
the
the
core
of
our
our
downtown
here
so
which
I
think
you
know
should
be
designed
for
the
the
walkable
uses
that
function
particularly
well
in
a
in
a
denser
downtown.
J
So
you
don't
Outlaw
drive-ins
everywhere,
but
I.
Think
removing
Auto
related
uses
from
our
downtown
would
be
fine.
But,
like
other
people
have
said,
we
also
don't
seem
to
have
a
big
problem
that
we're
solving
here.
So
it
doesn't
sound
like
that's,
probably
the
will
of
counseling.
So
that's
fine,
but
just
throw
that
in
there.
F
Yeah
I
I
want
to
speak
in
support
of
Rachel's
comments.
I
I,
you
know
just
from
empirical
evidence.
If
you
look
at
some
of
the
uses
of
drive-throughs,
the
Walgreens
on
on
Valmont
is
very
heavily
used
and
in
the
drive-through
capacity,
if
you
go
further
out,
then
it's
not
downtown,
but
just
as
an
example,
you
go
into
the
shopping
center
that
has
an
OZO
around
55th
Street.
There's
a
I
think
it's
a
Burger
King
or
Wendy's.
F
It
is
jammed
at
lunch,
and-
and
so
some
of
these
drive-throughs
do
perform
a
function
for
the
community
with
respect
to
car,
washes
I'm
I'm,
not
sure
I
actually
see
the
Nexus
between
dirty
cars
and
the
promotion
of
walking
it.
F
It's
not
an
essential
service,
but
people
will
want
to
get
their
cars
washed
at
some
point
in
time
and
I.
Don't
know
that
the
inability
to
do
that,
it's
going
to
make
them
say:
okay,
I'm
gonna,
walk
more,
it's
just
not
a
relationship
that
that
I
can
see
Leslie.
Do
you
know
how
many
gas
stations
we
have
left
in
town.
F
And
I
know
we're
we're
likely
at
some
point
to
be
losing
one
on
Baseline.
If
the
proposals
for
housing
there
go
forward-
and
you
know
we
are
still
in
an
environment
where
people
do
use
cars-
they're-
not
all
electric
and
they're
not
going
to
all
be
Electric
in
the
foreseeable
future-
and
you
know
you
can
force
everybody
to
drive
to
Costco
to
get
their
gas,
but
then
you're
spending
about
16
or
18
miles
round
trip
and
I.
F
Don't
know
that
that's
much
better
for
the
environment
than
being
able
to
get
gas
in
town,
so
I
I
understand
the
Instinct
here,
I'm,
just
not
seeing
that
we
are
actually
solving
any
of
the
issues
that
we're
that
are
generating
some
of
these
proposals
and
and
so
I'm
not
sure
this
is
the
problem.
We
need
to
be
addressing
entirely
thanks.
I
Yeah
I,
just
I,
actually
have
a
question
for
for
staff.
You
know
I,
you
know
you
all
know
that
there's
not
a
lot
of
these
uses.
You
know
downtown
in
this
area.
I
You
know,
I,
think
you
also
understand
some
of
the
things
we're
raising
and
so
I
feel,
like
I'm,
just
kind
of
missing
something
about
the
the
reason
that
you
all
work
that
game
this
might
be.
Something
to
do
you
know
is
it
just
because
people
were
saying
hey,
let's
get
rid
of
some
of
these
kinds
of
uses,
and
this
seemed
like
a
place.
We
could
potentially
do
that
because
there's
not
much
there
like
I,
just
I
feel
like
I.
Don't
I
just
want
to
give
you
an
opportunity
to.
N
Sure
so
this
was
something
that
was
brought
up
initially
by
the
planning
board
subcommittee,
which
is
the
group
that
in
2019
and
2020
went
through
line
by
line
with
the
use
table.
So
this
was
a
recommendation
that
came
directly
from
them
and
also
I.
Think
that
you
know,
even
though
we
don't
have
those
uses
now,
if
someone
were
to
come
in
with
a
development
proposal
for
that,
and
then
they
met
all
of
the
used
review
criteria
there.
N
It's
very
difficult
to
deny
it
used
interview,
and
so
just
thinking
of
the
goals
of
walkability
and
those
type
of
vehicle
related
uses
bring
a
lot
of
cars
to
an
area
which
is
inherently
at
odds
with
walkability.
So
that's
where
we
thought
that
this
was
something-
and
this
was
one
of
the
big
topics
where
we
were
curious
to
hear
the
public
input
on
it.
Kind
of
really
just
wanted
to
raise
it
as
a
potential
change
and
see
what
the
reaction
was
because
I
I
agree.
I
Well,
thank
you.
So
yes,
I
mean
if
we
so
basically
at
this
point
like
somebody
could
come
in
and
propose
to
put
five
gas
stations
downtown
and
it
would
not
need
to
go
through
use
review.
Was
that.
N
It
would
have
it
would
have
to
go
through
used
review,
but
you
know
if
they
met
the
use
review
criteria,
then
then
we
would
approve
the
use
review
if
they
were
able
to
be
approved.
So
yeah
I
think
that's
where
it
goes
through
a
discretionary
process,
but
there
is
still
that
potential
that
it
could
be
introduced
into
the
downtown
area.
I
Okay,
thank
you.
Yeah
I,
think
I,
just
I
have
some
similar
questions
just
kind
of
around
you
know:
electric
vehicle
use
and
and
how
you
know
charging
and
things
like
that
would
work
as
well
also
just
kind
of
recognizing
how
our
population
demographics
will
be
shifting
to
one
that
is
heavier
on
the
65
and
older
in
the
coming
decades.
I
You
know,
I
really
am
thinking
a
lot
about
sort
of
this
Mobility,
but
I'm
also
hoping
that
in
the
next
20
years,
we've
got
better
ways
of
getting
people
around
town
than
cars
as
well,
so
I
I
think
this
is
not.
You
know
one
that
that
feels
really
big
to
me
and
if
it,
if
it
does
kind
of
help,
prevent
more
cars,
downtown
I
like
that
idea
as
well.
D
B
Nope,
okay,
I
am
going
to
comment.
I
am
going
to
disagree
with
most
of
council
again
and
say
that
I
wish
that
we
would
be
able
to
well
I
wish.
We
would
be
able
to
prohibit
vehicle-related
uses
in
the
downtown
zoning
districts
at
least
some
of
them,
but
I
also
see
Lauren's
point.
Do
we
want
to
don't
we
want
to
make
things
easier,
less
burdensome,
but
still
in
all
the
idea
of
you
know.
B
N
N
These
are
other
opportunities
that
we
saw
looking
through
the
use
table
or
that
were
recommended
by
planning
board
subcommittee
or
a
working
group,
or
that
we've
heard
through
public
engagement,
where
we
could
change
the
youth
allowance
or
change
the
use
standards
to
support
these
uses
so
I've
grouped
them
into
the
type,
the
categories
that
we
have
in
the
use
table.
So
we
have
public
and
institutional
and
commercial
in
public
and
institutional.
N
The
three
opportunities
we
saw
and
a
lot
of
these
changes
are
focused
in
the
mixed
use
or
mu
zones,
and
the
BT,
which
is
the
one
we
talked
about,
is
the
transitional
business
zone.
So
that's
what
you
can
kind
of
see
in
the
the
parentheses
but
clubber
Lodge.
That's
a
community
center
or
like
a
masonic
lodge
currently
prohibited
in
the
mixed
use.
Zoning
districts
like
I,
mentioned
earlier.
Government
facilities
are
prohibited
so
allowing
those
we
also
saw
that
museum
M's
are
prohibited
in
the
mixed
use.
N
Zoning
districts,
rather
than
allowing
those
by
right
museums,
kind
of
like
private
schools
and
other
uses
in
our
use,
table
or
theaters.
They
tend
to
have
a
lot
of
people
come
at
once,
so
that's
usually
something
that
can
be
more
impactful
on
neighboring
properties
and
that's
usually
something
that
you
might
want
to
see.
A
use
review
just
to
be
able
to
evaluate
the
impacts
and
maybe
look
at
you
know,
access
patterns,
parking
things
like
that.
N
Just
have
a
closer
look
on
those
types
of
uses
that
might
have
more
of
an
impact
rather
than
allowing
those
by
right.
So
those
are
the
public
and
institutional
other
changes
in
the
commercial
section.
Animal
hospitals
also,
we
kind
of
we've
been
making
a
joke
that
the
impacts
are
related
to
parking
and
barking.
N
But
animal
hospitals
may
be
a
use
review
just
because
it
can
have
some
exterior
impacts.
Lots
of
animals
in
one
place
that
would
be
in
the
mixed
use.
Zoning
districts
currently
prohibited
allowing
hostels
in
the
mixed
use
two
and
three
zones
just
to
make
it
more
similar
to
how
they're
allowed
in
other
mixed
use
zones,
Medical
Offices,
allowing
those
a
small
scale
of
those
in
the
mixed-use
zoning
districts
or
mu1,
and
two
non-vehicular
Repair
and
Rental.
That's
like
your
vacuum
repair
things
like
that.
N
We've
heard
a
lot
of
like
well
we're
not
really
sure
that
those
businesses
would
open,
but
if
we
allowed
them,
maybe
we
would,
but
those
are
fairly
prohibitive
right
now,
so
allowing
those
with
a
size
limit,
so
they'd
be
small
scale
in
the
mixing
zoning
districts
BT,
which
is
the
business
transitional
and
BMS
such
as
business,
Main,
Street
and
then
retail.
This
is
one
of
the
most
surprising
ones
when
we
were
going
through
the
use
table
that
retail
is
actually
fairly
prohibited
in
the
mixed
use.
N
Zoning
districts
right
now
so
allowing
retail
with
a
size
limit,
particularly
in
mix
in
the
mu1
district
and
in
BT,
so
allowing
retail
so
shops
to
be
located
in
the
MU
one.
Two
and
three
and
BT
zoning
districts.
N
Just
kind
of
some
interesting
background
on
that
Boulder
was
one
of
the
first
cities
or
one
of
the
earliest
cities
to
adopt
mix-use
zoning
and
so
similar
to
some
other,
like
I,
was
here
recently
to
talk
about
edu's
when
we
were
the
first
one
to
do
something
you
kind
of
go
in
treading
lightly,
so
our
mixed
use.
Zoning
actually
now
now
we've
been
kind
of
eclipsed
by
other
cities
and
what
they
allow
in
mixed-use
zoning
districts,
and
we
actually
were
pretty
prohibitive
in
in
our
mixed
zoning
District.
N
So
there's
lots
of
opportunities
there
and
then
small
theater
rehearsal
space.
We've
heard
a
ton
of
support
for
small
music
venues
and
things
like
that
which
are
currently
prohibited.
Like
I
mentioned
with
the
museums,
that's
something
where
people
are
coming
and
going
a
lot
at
one
time,
and
so
that's
something
you
might
want
to
have
a
user
view
to
review
on
a
site-specific
basis
and
be
able
to
apply
standards
and
things
to
that
approval.
Finally,
temporary
events.
N
So
those
are
some
of
the
other
opportunities
that
we
identified.
These
are
ones
that
we've
been
presenting,
that's
to
the
community
for
their
input
so
far,
and
what
we've
heard
on
these
other
changes.
I
already
mentioned
people
just
keep
talking
about
post
offices,
lots
of
support
for
seeing
more
post
offices
for
that
governmental
facility
change,
lots
of
support
for
the
music
venue
idea
and
then
General
support
for
all
of
the
other
changes,
not
really
seeing
a
lot
of
or
hearing
a
lot
of
red
flags.
N
So
far
on
those
changes,
also
General
support
from
our
working
group
and
our
planning
board
Liaisons,
and
then
we
had
a
great,
more
General
conversation
with
the
community
connectors
just
about
the
value
of
walkability
and
permitting
more
of
these
uses,
and
that,
if
you're
able
to
walk
through
these
uses,
it
helps
to
build.
The
community
makes
the
neighborhood
feel
safer
and
to
get
to
know
your
neighbors.
If
you're
walking
around
like
I
mentioned
before
just
supporting
more
so
anything,
we
can
do
to
support
more
small
businesses
and
create
more
affordable
commercial
space.
N
N
B
Doesn't
matter
what
it
I
think
you
should
take
it
down,
you
just
put
it
in
the
chat
right
or
it's
in
the
chat.
B
M
Is
on
it
looks
mostly
great
I
had
a
couple
questions:
Club
Lodge,
especially
especially
after
you
said,
Masonic
Lodge,
like
I,
just
wondered
how
how
we
got
there
I,
don't
know
I,
think
of
those,
as
in
generally
sort
of
exclusive,
rather
than
inclusive
and
personally
belong
to
any.
So
how
did
we
come
to
prioritizing
clubs
and
lodges.
N
N
You
know
we
never
know
what
types
of
businesses
are
going
to
come
and
sometimes
we
have
to
assign
a
business
to
an
existing
use
definition.
So
there
might
be
some
kind
of
community
Lodge
that
is
open
to
everybody
that
would
fit
into
that
classification
that
we
would
want
people
to
be
able
to
access.
So
that
was
the
thinking
with
that.
M
One
okay
I
might
I
I,
might
not
like
that
depending
on
I.
Think
I'd
want
more
information,
because
if
we
allow
that
and
then
some
of
these
Prime
spaces
get
taken
up
in
walkable
neighborhoods
by
a
lot
of
people
who
are
going
to
be
driving
to
their
exclusive
clubs
because
they
probably
don't
live
right
near
it,
I
don't
like
I,
don't
know
if
I
like
that,
so
I
would
love
more
more
understanding
of
that
one
and
then
the
second
one.
The
word
that
jumped
out
at
me
was
hostels
and
I.
M
M
Might
be
curious
to
know
like
what?
What
does
that
look
like,
because
I
I,
imagine
community
members
who
might
be
impacted
might
want
to
know
what
is
what
do
we
mean
by
hostile?
What
is
that,
and
maybe
just
the
definition
for
the
next,
for
when
we
come
back
to
look
at
this
again?
Okay,
who's
who's
impacted
by
hostels
is
if
we
don't
have
any,
why
don't
we
have
any
in
two
and
three
and
maybe
I,
don't
more
information
on
hostels?
I,
don't
think!
That's
a
word
I've
seen
during
my
almost
four
years,
yeah.
M
Spent
some,
you
know
quite
merry
nights
in
European
hostels.
Definitely
not
I,
just
don't
understand,
but
I've
just
never
heard
of
them
here
and
don't
know
what
the
definition
is
or
what
that
looks
like
and
what
we
would
be
looking
at.
So
those
would
be
just
more
information.
I
would
love
for
the
next
time,
I'm
more
concerned
about
the
club,
Lodge
yeah
hostels
thanks.
Okay,
thanks.
J
Yeah
well
I'm
excited
about
these
changes,
so
thanks
very
much
for
bringing
them
forward.
You
know
a
lot
of
this.
These
changes
are
in
an
mu1
and
mu2,
which
is
those
are
exclusively
in
the
north
edge
of
town,
which
is
my
walkable
neighborhood,
and
actually
the
lack
of
retail
in
those
zones
has
been
a
pet
peeve
of
mine
for
20
years.
I,
remember
talking
to
to
local
business
owners
or
Property
Owners
nearby
I'm
like
well.
Why
are
all
these
storefronts
empty
and
they're
like?
Well?
J
We
can't
put
most
of
the
things
we
want
to
put
here
because
of
the
zoning
rules
and
I'm
like
wow.
That
doesn't
seem
right,
so
I'm
very
excited
to
be
changing
that
here,
because
I
think
that's
a
great
direction
to
go
in
and
and
and
and
true
of
just
pretty
much
all
the
ones
that
you're
proposing
you
know.
J
K
Thanks
Tara
yeah
I'll
start
with
the
the
kudos
to
the
planning
board
subcommittee
I'll.
Let
go
Aaron
that
that's
that
that
is
diving
into
the
weeds
and
the
epitome
of
it
and
someone's
got
to
do
it.
They
did
it
and
did
it
well.
So
thank
you
for
teaming
us
up
for
for
being
able
to
push
forward
some
good
work
and
then
staff
for
for
taking
the
torch
and
running
with
it.
A
couple
things.
One
is
and
kind
of
maybe
a
little
bit
of
a
housekeeping
issue
on
this.
K
Is
the
presentation
had
amazing
maps
from
which
gave
me
a
much
better
spatial
understanding
of
these
zones
and
where
they
are
in
relation
to
the
city
and
neighborhoods.
Those
Maps
were
not
in
the
packet
and
I'm
not
and
I'm,
thinking
that
from
the
community's
perspective,
if
they
want
to
look
at
it
now
we're
trying
to
look
at
it
or
go
back
to
look
at
this
one
it'd
be
nice
to
have
those
Maps.
K
So
I
don't
know
if
we
can
retroactively
just
add
that
as
an
addendum
to
this
packet,
so
it's
sort
of
memorialized
and
has
that
great
input,
but
those
maps
spatially
are
so
important.
So
just
future
thinking
as
we
do
this
so
much
of
planning
is
that
sort
of
geospatial
and
so
maps,
maps,
maps,
maps
and
more
maps
going
forward.
So
I
would
love
to
sort
of
make
a
call
out
for
that
and
and
speaking
of
maps.
K
One
thing
that
I'm
and
it
sort
of
goes
into
a
theme
of
what
I
was
trying
to
mention
earlier
is
about
future
proofing.
Some
of
this
work
because
we
are
going
to
be
increasing
density
and
the
allowable
uses
of
different
residential
and
stuff
throughout
the
city
and
I
really
want
to
make
sure
that
these
neighborhood
centers
are
being
built
on
the
Assumption
of
that
of
our
future
development,
not
what
it
is
now
and
I
know
the
comp
plan
and
other
things
kind
of
anchor
us
to
what
you
see.
K
I,
think
that
will
be
self-self-limiting
and
we
will
be
building
obsolescence
from
day
one.
So
I'd
really
love
to
see
how
we
can
think
about
what
we're
doing
I'm
thinking
like
the
planning
reserve
and
on
that
map
of
of
showing
you
those
sort
of
neighborhood
centers,
the
closest
one
to
that
is
number
five.
But
that's
that's
the
North
Broadway
North
Boulder,
one
that
already
serves
Aaron's
community
and
we're
going
to
have
500
Acres.
So
we've
got
a
new
neighbor,
Neighborhood
Center.
K
So
I
want
to
think
about
those
things
about
where
we're
headed
down
the
road
and
I
think
we'll
set
ourselves
up
for
success
for
the
next
20
50
years
for
that
matter.
So
so
those
are
the
those
are.
The
key
takeaways
is
just
sort
of.
How
do
we
build
with
intense
with
with
intention
in
that
regard
and
those
wonderful
Maps
which
you
guys
work
so
hard
on?
So
you
better
put
them
on
display
like
everywhere
and
show
some
love
to
your
great
map
makers
in
the
gis
folks
in
the
city
so
appreciate
it.
L
So
I'm
going
to
talk
about
unintended
consequences,
which
is
something
I
never
do,
but
in
Boulder
with
the
limited
number
of
event
spaces.
We
have.
L
So
I
would
like
to
see
us,
especially
at
the
very
small
end,
try
and
maybe
allow
those
by
right,
but
everything
else
I
was
super
psyched
on
and
just
in
general,
like
I
know
that
we
couldn't,
in
this
time
frame
tackle
the
15-minute
neighborhood
sort
of
thing,
but
I
just
I
hope
we
get
back
to
that
at
some
point,
because
to
me
that's
what
I
was
really
excited
about
with
this
project
and
I
think
that
the
things
that
are
in
it
are
good
but
they're,
not
creating
15-minute
neighborhoods
in
places
that
we
don't
already
have
them.
L
They
feels
like,
and
oh
also,
the
things
that
I
sort
of
said
no
to
for
me.
It's
it's
more
about
that.
We
all
have
limited
time
and
that
those
aren't
up
a
priority
for
me
rather
than
like
I'm,
absolutely
against
them,
it's
more
just
about
where
I
know
that
everything
we
see
is
planning
and
development
related
and
I
really
want
to
make
sure
that
you
guys
are
able
to
focus
on
the
things
that
get
us
the
most
bang
for
the
buck.
So
thank.
F
Yeah
I
I
want
to
jump
on
Rachel's
bandwagon
with
respect
to
lodges
and
and
the
the
like,
I'm,
not
quite
sure
what
it
is.
We
would
be
doing
there
I
like
the
idea
of
promoting
theater
spaces
and
gallery
spaces
and
museums.
F
I
I
would
want
to
be
a
little
cautious
about
the
compatibility
in
every
instance
of
musical
performance
spaces
with
their
neighbors,
and
we
might
want
to
think
a
little
bit
about
how
we
do
that,
because
that
that
can
be
a
little
disruptive
depending
upon
the
kind
of
venue
that
you're
creating
so
I
would
just
want
to
keep
that
in
mind
and,
like
my
colleagues,
I
want
to
be
very
grateful
to
the
planning
board
subcommittee
that
that
did
all
this
incredible
work.
F
Thank
you
very
much
and
I'm
I'm
glad
we
didn't
have
to
do
it.
I
I
do
for
distilling
it
down
for
us.
I
Thank
you.
I
just
wanted
to
Echo
some
of
Lauren's
comments
about
some
of
the
smaller
event
spaces,
and
you
know
thinking
about
how
we
can
make
sure
that
that's
accounted
for
as
well
and
also
you
know
for
me
when
I
look
at
these
lists
like
these
are
the
type
of
places
that
bring
people
together
in
neighborhoods
that
really
create
those
Community
connections
and
I
really
appreciate
the
idea
of
making
it
a
little
bit
easier
to
have
that
not
just
kind
of
performance
spaces.
I
It
is
so
to
the
degree
that
these
types
of
changes
can
make
those
kinds
of
spaces
easier
to
create
I,
especially
like
them
and
I
also
want
to
Echo
some
of
Lauren's
other
comments,
just
around
I'm
really
eager
for
the
work
of
creating
more
of
these
neighborhood
connection,
spaces
and
more
of
the
city,
so
that
you
know
you
don't
have
to
drive
for
a
mile
or
two
to
kind
of
get
there,
that
you
can
just
walk
and
be
there
in
15
minutes
so
really
eager
for
that
work
as
well.
But
thank
you
very
much.
I
B
Thanks
Nicole,
okay,
my
turn,
and
nobody
except
me
can
tell
myself
that
I'm
off
topics
and
I'm
not
going
to
do
that
so
I'm
going
to
go
off
topic.
First
of
all,
thanks
for
enjoying
that
Nicole
you,
let
me
hostels,
I'm,
not
excited
about
I,
don't
know.
Do
we
really
need
to
do
that?
I
agree
with
Rachel.
B
We
need
more
information
on
hostels,
but
everything
else,
I'm
good
with
so
now,
I'm
going
to
move
on
I've
been
thinking
about
the
neighborhood
center
concept
for
the
entire
week
every
day,
I
wake
up
and
think
about
it,
and
one
of
the
reasons.
Why
is
because
I
passed
base
Mars
my
neighborhood
center,
but
it's
anything
but
a
neighborhood
center
these
days
right.
First
of
all,
it
has
some
great
things.
As
an
example.
You
know
it
has
the
bridge
The
Underpass,
rather
to
connect
it
to
the
other
side
of
the
street.
B
It
has
a
coffee
shop,
but
it
also
lost
you
know.
Some
bigger
stores
and
I
can
walk
to
base
Mar,
but
I
have
no
reason
to
really
that
there
are
a
few
great
stores
there.
Oops
I
don't
want
to
offend
any
stores
that
are
there,
but
there's
less
reason
now
than
there
used
to
be
so.
B
What
I
would
like
to
see
is
a
reimagine
looking
at
some
of
the
old
neighborhood
centers
and
making
them
better
so
for
base
Mar
and
I'm
sure
this
is
nothing
to
do
with
this
topic,
but
maybe
it
has
to
be
a
council
priority.
Should
I
get
on
Council
in
the
next
term,
would
be
to
take
a
place
like
baseball
and
make
it
exciting
put
in
housing
and
mixed
use,
and
that
giant
parking
lot
is
just
terrible.
I
mean
there's
not
even
cars
there.
B
So
for
me,
reimagining
these
great
neighborhood
centers
or
that
used
to
be
better
than
they
are,
and
you
know
since
we
took
some,
you
know
someone
we
had
so
much
change
like
I
said
earlier
in
the
in
our
shopping
centers
because
of
and
neighborhood
centers
because
of
the
pandemics
I
think
it
would
be
a
really
good
idea
to
look
at
them
again.
B
Of
course,
space
Mars
mine,
so
I'm
pushing
that
as
number
one
I
thought
you
did
a
fantastic
job
tonight
and
made
us
re
I've.
Never
thought
this
would
be
such
an
exciting
topic
for
me,
but
it
truly
was,
and
so
I
really
appreciated
this
presentation
and
that's
what
I
have
to
say.
B
J
I
just
wanted
to
finish
by
asking
Tara.
If
you
could
get
back
on
topic,
please
no
just
kidding
I
just
wanted
to
give
a
final.
Thank
you
to
to
staff
for
the
extraordinary
work,
Lisa
and
and
your
team
there.
This
is
so
detail-oriented,
and
these
are
such
great
recommendations
they're,
going
to
make
a
real
difference
for
our
city
in
the
coming
years
and
decades.
So
just
greatly
appreciative
of
everything
you've
done,
but.
B
O
I
just
want
to
chime
in
and
say
thank
you
for
your
acknowledgment
of
the
good
work.
Lisa
has
done,
and
one
thing
that's
not
readily
apparent
in
either
the
staff
reports
or
presentations
is
all
of
the
minutia
of
setting
up
meetings
and
meeting
asking
detailed
questions
and
all
that
so
I
I
know.
You
know
that,
but
just
for
the
general
public.
That's
a
lot
of
the
real
boots
on
the
ground
kind
of
work
and
really
appreciate
the
work
of
Lisa
and
team.
N
Yeah
thanks
everybody
for
the
this
has
been
a
really
great
discussion.
I
am
clearly
very
in
the
weeds
of
this,
so
it's
been
really
fun
doing
all
the
public
engagement
and
chatting
with
everyone
over
the
last
few
weeks
about
it
and
like
getting
to
talk
to
other
people,
but
especially
this
conversation
with
you
all
has
been
really
great
and
you've
given
really
really
helpful.
Direction.
So
I
appreciate
that
I
did
just
want
to
tell
you
just
kind
of
the
schedule
for
the
project
we'll
be
taking
we'll
be
closing
the
questionnaire
on
July
31st.
N
Please
do
promote
it
to
people,
so
we
get
more
people
to
answer.
It.
I
think
the
story
map
is
a
really
cool
tool
that
we
haven't
used
before
so
check
that
out
and
share
it
with
others.
N
We've
been
posting
it
on
social
media,
so
you
can
share
that
too,
and
then
also
so
then
we'll
be
refining
an
ordinance
based
on
the
public
input
and
the
direction
we've
received
from
you
tonight
we'll
go
to
planning
board
in
August
kind
of
mid-august
for
their
recommendation,
and
then
we're
currently
scheduled
to
see
you
all
for
an
ordinance
in
October.
For
first
and
then
November
2nd
for
second
reading,
so
that's
when
you
can
anticipate
seeing
the
actual
ornaments
before
you
and
again.
Thank
you
so
much
for
your
time
on
this
Lisa.
N
Yeah,
so
if
you
just
go
to
the
use
table
page
on
the
city
website,
it
has
a
link
to
it.
It's
also.
What
is
that
page
called
the
the
like
main
engagement
page
on
the
city?
Has
a
big
blurb
about
it.
Facebook
and
Twitter
are
both
posted
about
it.
N
O
If
you
put
use
table
in
the
General
search
bar
too
I,
think
that
is
yeah.